Naguib Mahfouz...Winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Children of the Alley
Naguib Mahfouz (of Egypt) is one of my favorite authors, mainly, I think, for his intergenerational approach to storytelling. I am currently finishing his Children of the Alley in which he traverses something like 10 generations as he retells the story of humanity from a decidedly Egyptian local perspective. Michener and Uris do some of the same in their works.
I am keenly aware of the importance of raising godly children and the fact that each of these generations leaves only their children and their children’s values behind them, and these intergenerational stories subtly emphasize this point no matter who writes them.
My wife and I have no children of our own nor can we have any of our own. Before I get 100 responses telling me to wear boxers and telling us to relax, I should explain. First, our “complications” are not that simple. Second, we chose long ago (we knew this well before we married) to accept whatever hand we were dealt in life trusting that God had a design for our life. We chose to submit rather than spend all of our time, emotions, and passions fighting for what we want. I’m not saying that those who choose otherwise are wrong just that this is what we’ve chosen.
It could be that this is why I’m a pastor and Jennifer is a kindergarten teacher. Jennifer treats her students as her own children. I think part of the reason is that she doesn’t have the stress of going home to take care of her own kids after school. We are also very free to follow where ever the Lord leads. I don’t have to worry about even leaving an inheritance. We could move across the country tomorrow upon the Lord’s command with little implication.
I should note that there is D’Montiz. He lives with his great-grandma, and has been “hanging out” with us for about a year and a half. He says we treat him like a son, and sometimes I feel like that. Sometimes I wonder what I’m leaving in him for the future. It is also painful to be that close to a 10 year old, but not be able to actually call him your son. You always have to be ready for him to be gone from your life.
In closing, there are two tendencies that being childless create. First, I tend to despise the taking of children for granted and not spend time with them or especially putting them in daycare. Second, I tend to be very sensitive to how children are raised, what they are taught and how they are disciplined. I look at families, and think about how different I would feel if I were in their situation. It is the lack of the child that shows just how much more important the children are.
The truth is that if I had children, I’d probably be much more casual about this topic, but all I can do is know and understand that I haven’t walked in the shoes of the parent.
Naguib Mahfouz (of Egypt) is one of my favorite authors, mainly, I think, for his intergenerational approach to storytelling. I am currently finishing his Children of the Alley in which he traverses something like 10 generations as he retells the story of humanity from a decidedly Egyptian local perspective. Michener and Uris do some of the same in their works.
I am keenly aware of the importance of raising godly children and the fact that each of these generations leaves only their children and their children’s values behind them, and these intergenerational stories subtly emphasize this point no matter who writes them.
My wife and I have no children of our own nor can we have any of our own. Before I get 100 responses telling me to wear boxers and telling us to relax, I should explain. First, our “complications” are not that simple. Second, we chose long ago (we knew this well before we married) to accept whatever hand we were dealt in life trusting that God had a design for our life. We chose to submit rather than spend all of our time, emotions, and passions fighting for what we want. I’m not saying that those who choose otherwise are wrong just that this is what we’ve chosen.
It could be that this is why I’m a pastor and Jennifer is a kindergarten teacher. Jennifer treats her students as her own children. I think part of the reason is that she doesn’t have the stress of going home to take care of her own kids after school. We are also very free to follow where ever the Lord leads. I don’t have to worry about even leaving an inheritance. We could move across the country tomorrow upon the Lord’s command with little implication.
I should note that there is D’Montiz. He lives with his great-grandma, and has been “hanging out” with us for about a year and a half. He says we treat him like a son, and sometimes I feel like that. Sometimes I wonder what I’m leaving in him for the future. It is also painful to be that close to a 10 year old, but not be able to actually call him your son. You always have to be ready for him to be gone from your life.
In closing, there are two tendencies that being childless create. First, I tend to despise the taking of children for granted and not spend time with them or especially putting them in daycare. Second, I tend to be very sensitive to how children are raised, what they are taught and how they are disciplined. I look at families, and think about how different I would feel if I were in their situation. It is the lack of the child that shows just how much more important the children are.
The truth is that if I had children, I’d probably be much more casual about this topic, but all I can do is know and understand that I haven’t walked in the shoes of the parent.
Monday, February 21, 2005
Flossing Can Change Your Life (As an update to the immediately preceding post)
I went to the dentist today for my semiannual torture session. Judy, the hygienist, marveled at how great my teeth looked. She said she only found one area of build up. The dentist said everything looked great and to keep up the good work. I told Judy that I have never heard that from a dentist before. Actually, for the first time in my life, I had brushed my teeth every day and flossed every day between visits.
Later, I wondered about what made me change and begin flossing my teeth. What was it that really led to my change of action? For some reason, I’ve begun to care, but I can’t put a finger on the decision or the point at which I knew that I’d become a militant flosser.
I feel myself changing in other areas, but I’m not sure what to make of it. Maybe it’s aging. Maybe it’s the work of the Lord in my life. Maybe it’s just that I’m wearing down. I’m not sure.
I went to the dentist today for my semiannual torture session. Judy, the hygienist, marveled at how great my teeth looked. She said she only found one area of build up. The dentist said everything looked great and to keep up the good work. I told Judy that I have never heard that from a dentist before. Actually, for the first time in my life, I had brushed my teeth every day and flossed every day between visits.
Later, I wondered about what made me change and begin flossing my teeth. What was it that really led to my change of action? For some reason, I’ve begun to care, but I can’t put a finger on the decision or the point at which I knew that I’d become a militant flosser.
I feel myself changing in other areas, but I’m not sure what to make of it. Maybe it’s aging. Maybe it’s the work of the Lord in my life. Maybe it’s just that I’m wearing down. I’m not sure.
Physician…heal thyself?
I’ve been haunted this last week with the question of my own ability to change those things that I hate about my own life.
I have looked into the lives of a number of struggling people, and I see the repetition of sin, bad choices, the need for personal gratification, the lack of real commitment to make real change, the exchange of resolve with rhetoric, and the morphine of starting over again and again and again. I was complaining to God about the lack of true grit in the people.
His response to me was typical. He immediately brought to my attention three pits of destruction in my life. He asked what I had done to resolve these three areas of sin, lack of discipline, bad choices, and lack of commitment. He said that I’ve talked about….
I have been reading Flannery O’Conner’s The Violent Bear It Away, and in the book, Tarwater is unable to escape the driving downfalls in his life. He fights with all that is in him to overcome his condition, but he is unable to alter the life that he lives. It is a story of shocking failure. It is a story that makes us feel smaller. Every step along the way, Tarwater regrets his condition and his actions…just like I do…
Regret is not repentance.
I’ve been haunted this last week with the question of my own ability to change those things that I hate about my own life.
I have looked into the lives of a number of struggling people, and I see the repetition of sin, bad choices, the need for personal gratification, the lack of real commitment to make real change, the exchange of resolve with rhetoric, and the morphine of starting over again and again and again. I was complaining to God about the lack of true grit in the people.
His response to me was typical. He immediately brought to my attention three pits of destruction in my life. He asked what I had done to resolve these three areas of sin, lack of discipline, bad choices, and lack of commitment. He said that I’ve talked about….
I have been reading Flannery O’Conner’s The Violent Bear It Away, and in the book, Tarwater is unable to escape the driving downfalls in his life. He fights with all that is in him to overcome his condition, but he is unable to alter the life that he lives. It is a story of shocking failure. It is a story that makes us feel smaller. Every step along the way, Tarwater regrets his condition and his actions…just like I do…
Regret is not repentance.
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Less can be More
Shishak took the temple treasures from Rehoboam. He took all the gold ornaments and especially the gold shields used by the guards. Rehoboam responded quickly and decisively. He had bronze shields made to keep up the appearances. In fact, the bronze shields were stored away for safe keeping unless their bright bronze shields presenting them to the king. As he left, they hurriedly returned them safely to their storage room.
God knows what his children can handle and how faithful they will be with different things. For instance, I would not be faithful with a million dollars at this point; therefore, I don’t have it. Is that a blessing or a curse?
Rehoboam was not strong enough to be faithful with a gold ordained temple, and the Lord saw to it that he didn’t have to be. Rehoboam was exceptionally faithful with a bronze ordained temple, and God blessed the nation with peace for nearly his entire reign.
I know that I would make a god out of television; so, I don’t have one. I would make a god out of nice cars; so, I don’t drive a car that I can’t walk away from at any time. Wouldn’t it make sense that God would care for us in that way as well?
Thomas Jonathan Jackson, (i.e., Stonewall Jackson) once said that he didn’t use tobacco in any form. Why? He found that he liked it too much.
Shishak took the temple treasures from Rehoboam. He took all the gold ornaments and especially the gold shields used by the guards. Rehoboam responded quickly and decisively. He had bronze shields made to keep up the appearances. In fact, the bronze shields were stored away for safe keeping unless their bright bronze shields presenting them to the king. As he left, they hurriedly returned them safely to their storage room.
God knows what his children can handle and how faithful they will be with different things. For instance, I would not be faithful with a million dollars at this point; therefore, I don’t have it. Is that a blessing or a curse?
Rehoboam was not strong enough to be faithful with a gold ordained temple, and the Lord saw to it that he didn’t have to be. Rehoboam was exceptionally faithful with a bronze ordained temple, and God blessed the nation with peace for nearly his entire reign.
I know that I would make a god out of television; so, I don’t have one. I would make a god out of nice cars; so, I don’t drive a car that I can’t walk away from at any time. Wouldn’t it make sense that God would care for us in that way as well?
Thomas Jonathan Jackson, (i.e., Stonewall Jackson) once said that he didn’t use tobacco in any form. Why? He found that he liked it too much.
Wednesday, February 09, 2005
Minimum Wage
Sorry, but I forgot about the Governor's minimum wage proposal. Instead of raising the minimum wage to $7.15 an hour let's raise it to $100 an hour and it will take care of all our problems. Of course, it will cost $40 for a loaf of bread and $500 a month for cable, but who cares.
The minimum wage paid in society is and will always be strickly a matter of economics. The relation of wages to prices will never be influenced by government mandated wage increases. Government can manadate wages, but prices will just follow.
The truth is that by increasing minimum wage we actually increase the gap between the wealthiest wage earners and the poorest wage earners...but we'll leave that for a later expose'.
Sorry, but I forgot about the Governor's minimum wage proposal. Instead of raising the minimum wage to $7.15 an hour let's raise it to $100 an hour and it will take care of all our problems. Of course, it will cost $40 for a loaf of bread and $500 a month for cable, but who cares.
The minimum wage paid in society is and will always be strickly a matter of economics. The relation of wages to prices will never be influenced by government mandated wage increases. Government can manadate wages, but prices will just follow.
The truth is that by increasing minimum wage we actually increase the gap between the wealthiest wage earners and the poorest wage earners...but we'll leave that for a later expose'.
The World is Run by Idiots
I don’t want to alarm anyone, but I once worked in the Michigan legislature. The first thing I learned when I went there was that the little protective halo that I had, the idea that someone somewhere actually knew what was going on, was a false halo and false assumption on my part. Let me examine a couple of ideas in Governor Granholm’s speech last night.
First, she wants to amend the constitution in order to borrow $2 billion from our children to invest in research. She says that she’ll create 72,000 jobs by investing the $2,000,000,000. So the state will be paying approximately $54,000 per job after finance costs. All this proposal does is create a welfare program for college grads. And the best part? Our children and grandchildren get to pay for jobs long since gone with the wind.
Second, the Governor is perpetuating the myth that the major impediment to college is financial. I know absolutely destitute, poverty stricken people who are able to go to college (through grants and loans). I know of single mothers who are able to attend. When I was at the University of Michigan getting my MBA (which I paid every single dollar of), there was a single mom in the program. She ended up dropping out. Not for financial reasons mind you. By her own account, she would stay up all not instant messaging on AOL and therefore not get her work done. The problem has to do with what is inside of people not how much money they have, and $1,500 more for college isn’t going to make a difference.
Third, she wants to quick train people in various professions which have a high demand right now. Now, I can tell you that I really don’t want the unemployed person who can’t hold down a job at Burger King working an IV into my arm at the hospital. It is a generalization I know, but she generalized as well. In general, the unemployed right now are unemployed for a reason. And its not because their so clever. So, the Governor is going to make them nurses and construction workers. They have been unfaithful with a little so she’s going to make them ruler over much (pardon the Biblical allusion).
It is amazing how clever they think they are, but most of these politician are second rate, half-wits at best.
Well, that’s my first “political” rant on this blog. It was a long time coming, and I’ll try not to bore you again with one for a long time. It’s just that when someone starts picking my pocket, especially for hair-brained schemes, I get a little agitated.
I don’t want to alarm anyone, but I once worked in the Michigan legislature. The first thing I learned when I went there was that the little protective halo that I had, the idea that someone somewhere actually knew what was going on, was a false halo and false assumption on my part. Let me examine a couple of ideas in Governor Granholm’s speech last night.
First, she wants to amend the constitution in order to borrow $2 billion from our children to invest in research. She says that she’ll create 72,000 jobs by investing the $2,000,000,000. So the state will be paying approximately $54,000 per job after finance costs. All this proposal does is create a welfare program for college grads. And the best part? Our children and grandchildren get to pay for jobs long since gone with the wind.
Second, the Governor is perpetuating the myth that the major impediment to college is financial. I know absolutely destitute, poverty stricken people who are able to go to college (through grants and loans). I know of single mothers who are able to attend. When I was at the University of Michigan getting my MBA (which I paid every single dollar of), there was a single mom in the program. She ended up dropping out. Not for financial reasons mind you. By her own account, she would stay up all not instant messaging on AOL and therefore not get her work done. The problem has to do with what is inside of people not how much money they have, and $1,500 more for college isn’t going to make a difference.
Third, she wants to quick train people in various professions which have a high demand right now. Now, I can tell you that I really don’t want the unemployed person who can’t hold down a job at Burger King working an IV into my arm at the hospital. It is a generalization I know, but she generalized as well. In general, the unemployed right now are unemployed for a reason. And its not because their so clever. So, the Governor is going to make them nurses and construction workers. They have been unfaithful with a little so she’s going to make them ruler over much (pardon the Biblical allusion).
It is amazing how clever they think they are, but most of these politician are second rate, half-wits at best.
Well, that’s my first “political” rant on this blog. It was a long time coming, and I’ll try not to bore you again with one for a long time. It’s just that when someone starts picking my pocket, especially for hair-brained schemes, I get a little agitated.
Sunday, February 06, 2005
Caricatures
Every great novel is more than a good story. It is a tool to convey the author’s philosophy, ideas, or point of view.
In his book England, England, Julian Barnes asserts through one of his characters, Sir Jack, that on the whole people prefer replicas to the real thing. In museums, replica art tends to attract more people for longer observations than the real thing. People tend to prefer the reconstituted, even in ideas and history. History tends to be reduced quickly to caricatures of the original very quickly. Who was Julius Caesar really? Who was George Washington really? As human being we tend to subtly create new characters from the ashes of the real thing.
I see this when I perform a funeral. The caricatures begin within moments of the person’s passing. We remember this or that and others reinforce it. Pretty soon a person’s 80 year life is boiled down to: She loved her family, knitting, Thursday night bingo and taking care of the pets. Is this really what she was all about?
We also do this with the Bible. We fill our minds with suppositions about what the Bible says. We hear other people’s suppositions, and we make them our own. We accept cultural norms and read the Bible through the eyes of the world around us. In America we accept as fact things like: choice is sacred, democracy is a God ordained form of government, and the love of God trumps all of His other facets (i.e., His hatred, his jealousy, and His vengeance).
As an example of caricature, I had someone tell me after a funeral the other day after a funeral that I preached, “Well, she’s with God, and that’s where we’re all headed.” I thought, “Not necessarily all of us.”
Every great novel is more than a good story. It is a tool to convey the author’s philosophy, ideas, or point of view.
In his book England, England, Julian Barnes asserts through one of his characters, Sir Jack, that on the whole people prefer replicas to the real thing. In museums, replica art tends to attract more people for longer observations than the real thing. People tend to prefer the reconstituted, even in ideas and history. History tends to be reduced quickly to caricatures of the original very quickly. Who was Julius Caesar really? Who was George Washington really? As human being we tend to subtly create new characters from the ashes of the real thing.
I see this when I perform a funeral. The caricatures begin within moments of the person’s passing. We remember this or that and others reinforce it. Pretty soon a person’s 80 year life is boiled down to: She loved her family, knitting, Thursday night bingo and taking care of the pets. Is this really what she was all about?
We also do this with the Bible. We fill our minds with suppositions about what the Bible says. We hear other people’s suppositions, and we make them our own. We accept cultural norms and read the Bible through the eyes of the world around us. In America we accept as fact things like: choice is sacred, democracy is a God ordained form of government, and the love of God trumps all of His other facets (i.e., His hatred, his jealousy, and His vengeance).
As an example of caricature, I had someone tell me after a funeral the other day after a funeral that I preached, “Well, she’s with God, and that’s where we’re all headed.” I thought, “Not necessarily all of us.”
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
Kill the Mocking Bird
Many rulers believed in Jesus. However, they wouldn't admit it publicly because the Pharisees would have thrown them out of the synagogue. They were more concerned about what people thought of them than about what God thought of them.
(John 12:42-43)
We serve (i.e., we are the slave of) whoever’s opinion of us we are concerned with. Perhaps we serve ourselves, perhaps some heathen relative or cow-orker (it’s a Dilbertism), or someone of the opposite sex that we’re trying to impress. There are probably a few temporal benefits to pleasing others, but the benefits of pleasing God are eternal.
I run in to Christian after Christian (perhaps I need quote marks around those two proper names) who believe in God but who are quite willing to continue heedlessly in open sin and rebellion with little thought about the consequences. Then I stop and look in the mirror…Dope! I do the same thing just different vices.
Many rulers believed in Jesus. However, they wouldn't admit it publicly because the Pharisees would have thrown them out of the synagogue. They were more concerned about what people thought of them than about what God thought of them.
(John 12:42-43)
We serve (i.e., we are the slave of) whoever’s opinion of us we are concerned with. Perhaps we serve ourselves, perhaps some heathen relative or cow-orker (it’s a Dilbertism), or someone of the opposite sex that we’re trying to impress. There are probably a few temporal benefits to pleasing others, but the benefits of pleasing God are eternal.
I run in to Christian after Christian (perhaps I need quote marks around those two proper names) who believe in God but who are quite willing to continue heedlessly in open sin and rebellion with little thought about the consequences. Then I stop and look in the mirror…Dope! I do the same thing just different vices.
Love Will Keep Us Together
I remember when we moved into our home outside of Big Rapids, way out in the country. I remember that dad had taken a job where he started an agricultural store/office in Reed City for Allegan Pipe and Supply, and as an entrepreneur, dad ended up working from before dawn ‘til after dusk many times. Twelve hour days were the norm for him, and I can remember as an 8, 9 and 10 year old hating him for never being around. When he was around he built a shed out back. He built a deck, a new driveway, planted a tree line, dug a pond, and remodeled the basement. I remember him putting in a new well by hand. I tried to help with that. I guess what I really remember tonight is all the sweat.
Mom worked hard too. She always canned, sewed, and took care of us kids and the house. I remember shelves and shelves of canned fruit and vegetables…hundreds of jars of beans at a time. Mom took care of the two runt pigs that we raised, and then she cooked them after we got the meat back from the butcher. Mom would work all day taking care of us kids, cleaning the house, doing laundry, shopping, and so on. Then, after dad got home, mom would go put on Home Interior parties to make extra money on the side for us to survive.
I remember dad, mom, and us three boys getting caught in a snowstorm in the little hatchback, Dodge Colt, and getting stuck about every 50 feet for miles as we tried to get home. I remember that every Christmas we got something awe inspiring. I remember one year I got a BB gun, and I thought it was the same kind as the neighbor kids (I was wrong.). His was junk, and so I was totally unimpressed. I think today how I would feel if a kid of mine reacted as I did that day…it was crush me.
I’m now almost the age my dad was when I first started driving the car, and as I look back I’m amazed at how these young kids raised a family. Although I never knew it at the time, we lived below the poverty line most of the time until I got into high school, but we never seemed to want anything.
My point is that marriage is largely about blood, sweat and tears. It’s more about finding someone to be your partner through these trials than finding the best romancer or the hottest chic. My advice: pick someone you can rely on. I did. Well, she’s hot too.
I remember when we moved into our home outside of Big Rapids, way out in the country. I remember that dad had taken a job where he started an agricultural store/office in Reed City for Allegan Pipe and Supply, and as an entrepreneur, dad ended up working from before dawn ‘til after dusk many times. Twelve hour days were the norm for him, and I can remember as an 8, 9 and 10 year old hating him for never being around. When he was around he built a shed out back. He built a deck, a new driveway, planted a tree line, dug a pond, and remodeled the basement. I remember him putting in a new well by hand. I tried to help with that. I guess what I really remember tonight is all the sweat.
Mom worked hard too. She always canned, sewed, and took care of us kids and the house. I remember shelves and shelves of canned fruit and vegetables…hundreds of jars of beans at a time. Mom took care of the two runt pigs that we raised, and then she cooked them after we got the meat back from the butcher. Mom would work all day taking care of us kids, cleaning the house, doing laundry, shopping, and so on. Then, after dad got home, mom would go put on Home Interior parties to make extra money on the side for us to survive.
I remember dad, mom, and us three boys getting caught in a snowstorm in the little hatchback, Dodge Colt, and getting stuck about every 50 feet for miles as we tried to get home. I remember that every Christmas we got something awe inspiring. I remember one year I got a BB gun, and I thought it was the same kind as the neighbor kids (I was wrong.). His was junk, and so I was totally unimpressed. I think today how I would feel if a kid of mine reacted as I did that day…it was crush me.
I’m now almost the age my dad was when I first started driving the car, and as I look back I’m amazed at how these young kids raised a family. Although I never knew it at the time, we lived below the poverty line most of the time until I got into high school, but we never seemed to want anything.
My point is that marriage is largely about blood, sweat and tears. It’s more about finding someone to be your partner through these trials than finding the best romancer or the hottest chic. My advice: pick someone you can rely on. I did. Well, she’s hot too.
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
A Messianic View of the Ministry
Jesus called the apostles and said, "You know that the acknowledged rulers of nations have absolute power over people and their officials have absolute authority over people. But that's not the way it's going to be among you. Whoever wants to become great among you will be your servant. Whoever wants to be most important among you will be a slave for everyone.
(Mar 10:42-44)
I used to think this passage was Christ instructing us on how to become a great Christian or a great minister, but as I read it today, I saw it as a warning. It doesn’t say that if we become a servant to others we will become great, but it says that our ambition will make us a slave to others.
The more personal ambition I have or the more I crave personal glory or personal gratitude or personal recognition as a minister the more I subject myself to the whims of the people. This approach ensures that I jump when anyone calls. I’ll run to the hospital. I’ll run to pray with someone. I’ll end up having my time dictated by others because I want to be loved and admired by them.
When I place the kingdom ahead of myself and my own feelings or ambitions, I no longer subject myself to the whims of the people, but I subject myself simply to the will of the Lord. I redirect praise and credit. I encourage and empower others to ministry, and they get the glory for serving others. I decrease, and the Lord increases.
Jesus called the apostles and said, "You know that the acknowledged rulers of nations have absolute power over people and their officials have absolute authority over people. But that's not the way it's going to be among you. Whoever wants to become great among you will be your servant. Whoever wants to be most important among you will be a slave for everyone.
(Mar 10:42-44)
I used to think this passage was Christ instructing us on how to become a great Christian or a great minister, but as I read it today, I saw it as a warning. It doesn’t say that if we become a servant to others we will become great, but it says that our ambition will make us a slave to others.
The more personal ambition I have or the more I crave personal glory or personal gratitude or personal recognition as a minister the more I subject myself to the whims of the people. This approach ensures that I jump when anyone calls. I’ll run to the hospital. I’ll run to pray with someone. I’ll end up having my time dictated by others because I want to be loved and admired by them.
When I place the kingdom ahead of myself and my own feelings or ambitions, I no longer subject myself to the whims of the people, but I subject myself simply to the will of the Lord. I redirect praise and credit. I encourage and empower others to ministry, and they get the glory for serving others. I decrease, and the Lord increases.
Monday, January 31, 2005
Obtuse, Purple and Clairvoyant
I lament my obtuse mind. Years of public school and television have honed my quick whit to a veritable oblivion. Alas, I am not alone. We have a generation, perhaps two, of slow, amused sloths. Let me give you an example of our total lack of logical precision and curiosity.
The question of free will versus predestination has plagued the church for thousands of years; however, modern evangelicals, of whom I am one, seem to be able to so easily dismiss it. We use phrases to defend our position: “whosoever will”, or “if anyone hears my voice and opens the door”, or “if you call on my name”…the list goes on. It all seems so easy, that I used to wonder why all the hassle all these years.
The problem, I now see, is that I was too stupid to see the real question. I filled my mind with things that I had assumed to be true with no verification whatsoever. For instance, I assumed that “whosoever” inherently means anyone can. It simply means “whatever person”, and the word has no bearing on who is able to. If I said, “Whatever person gets an A on the test will come with me.” I make no claims about individuals having equal opportunity to get an A. We live in an egalitarian democratic society that values personal freedom over all else so we tend to assume it where it may or may not belong.
I tended to focus on the action and the “if/then” statements, but the real question comes before the if/then. The real question is what determines one’s ability to complete the “if”?
For instance, Revelation 3:20 states “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him and he with Me.” This seems to our modern, western thinking to state that anyone can open the door to Christ, but Romans 10:17 states the emphatic opposite. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. The passage continues with the fact that many Jews heard and didn’t gain faith because God himself had stopped up their ears to the understanding of the truth lest they turn to Christ.
In short the question is not:
Whoever comes to Christ = Salvation
The question is:
Whoever is able to hear + Whoever comes to Christ = Salvation
Calvin said that if you are able to hear you will by necessity come to Christ. Arminius said that you may come to Christ if you are able to hear. Pelagius said that anyone can come to Christ.
Oh, my obtuse head is aching.
The next question is “Do I control my will or does my will control me?”
I lament my obtuse mind. Years of public school and television have honed my quick whit to a veritable oblivion. Alas, I am not alone. We have a generation, perhaps two, of slow, amused sloths. Let me give you an example of our total lack of logical precision and curiosity.
The question of free will versus predestination has plagued the church for thousands of years; however, modern evangelicals, of whom I am one, seem to be able to so easily dismiss it. We use phrases to defend our position: “whosoever will”, or “if anyone hears my voice and opens the door”, or “if you call on my name”…the list goes on. It all seems so easy, that I used to wonder why all the hassle all these years.
The problem, I now see, is that I was too stupid to see the real question. I filled my mind with things that I had assumed to be true with no verification whatsoever. For instance, I assumed that “whosoever” inherently means anyone can. It simply means “whatever person”, and the word has no bearing on who is able to. If I said, “Whatever person gets an A on the test will come with me.” I make no claims about individuals having equal opportunity to get an A. We live in an egalitarian democratic society that values personal freedom over all else so we tend to assume it where it may or may not belong.
I tended to focus on the action and the “if/then” statements, but the real question comes before the if/then. The real question is what determines one’s ability to complete the “if”?
For instance, Revelation 3:20 states “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him and he with Me.” This seems to our modern, western thinking to state that anyone can open the door to Christ, but Romans 10:17 states the emphatic opposite. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. The passage continues with the fact that many Jews heard and didn’t gain faith because God himself had stopped up their ears to the understanding of the truth lest they turn to Christ.
In short the question is not:
Whoever comes to Christ = Salvation
The question is:
Whoever is able to hear + Whoever comes to Christ = Salvation
Calvin said that if you are able to hear you will by necessity come to Christ. Arminius said that you may come to Christ if you are able to hear. Pelagius said that anyone can come to Christ.
Oh, my obtuse head is aching.
The next question is “Do I control my will or does my will control me?”
Saturday, January 29, 2005
Purgatory
I believe that nothing in my life happens by chance, every encounter I have, every advertisement I read, every news report I hear, every person I meet is appointed by God. It was once said that if there is a single molecule in the universe that God is not explicitly in control of then He cannot be God.
God is personal, and He personally cares for me and you. He is constantly teaching us, growing us in His ways, and perfecting us. I’ve been asked if I believe in Purgatory (This is the holding place that a Christian may be kept in as they are prepared for heaven.), and to this I reply a hearty “yes”. Then I finish with, “we are now in purgatory.” We are now being prepared for heaven. Our journey here on earth is two-fold. We do the work of the Lord and expand the kingdom of God, but we are made righteous and prepared to meet our Savior.
What I’ve been really thinking about lately is what the purpose is for each individual God brings across my path. Some people are difficult to deal with, and perhaps a challenge to love. Some may be stubbornly irresponsible or even rebellious. Some may be sanctimoniously righteous in their own eyes. Some may be complex while others lead simple lives. Each person I meet, deal with, correct, am corrected by or visit with has an impact on me and is purposed by God to lead me up the path of righteousness. So, sometimes I just stop and try to figure out why I am where I am, why I am with who I’m with and why I’m doing what I’m doing.
I believe that nothing in my life happens by chance, every encounter I have, every advertisement I read, every news report I hear, every person I meet is appointed by God. It was once said that if there is a single molecule in the universe that God is not explicitly in control of then He cannot be God.
God is personal, and He personally cares for me and you. He is constantly teaching us, growing us in His ways, and perfecting us. I’ve been asked if I believe in Purgatory (This is the holding place that a Christian may be kept in as they are prepared for heaven.), and to this I reply a hearty “yes”. Then I finish with, “we are now in purgatory.” We are now being prepared for heaven. Our journey here on earth is two-fold. We do the work of the Lord and expand the kingdom of God, but we are made righteous and prepared to meet our Savior.
What I’ve been really thinking about lately is what the purpose is for each individual God brings across my path. Some people are difficult to deal with, and perhaps a challenge to love. Some may be stubbornly irresponsible or even rebellious. Some may be sanctimoniously righteous in their own eyes. Some may be complex while others lead simple lives. Each person I meet, deal with, correct, am corrected by or visit with has an impact on me and is purposed by God to lead me up the path of righteousness. So, sometimes I just stop and try to figure out why I am where I am, why I am with who I’m with and why I’m doing what I’m doing.
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Stewardship of the Body of Christ
God places men to be stewards over his children. He calls them shepherds or pastors. These men are charged with the awesome responsibility of feeding, leading and protecting the flock God entrusts them with. God entrusts a man with a flock and instructs him to create disciples. Discipline is required by God of His children. However, God is not looking for a people who cower like abused dogs beaten with zealous, fundamentalist dogma exchanging the word of God for manmade rules giving an outward appearance of righteousness. God is looking for self-disciplined children who have been taught, exhorted, cajoled and coaxed into self-discipline. God’s children are not our children, and we must take great care in how we lead them to a disciplined life. The pastors are not their fathers but rather their teachers and guides. As one tries to instill self-discipline in other people’s children, one has two tools: the amount of time one spends with the child (more or less depending on the attitude and actions) and warnings as a form of attempted protection of the child and others. This is the frustration and this is the challenge of the pastor.
God places men to be stewards over his children. He calls them shepherds or pastors. These men are charged with the awesome responsibility of feeding, leading and protecting the flock God entrusts them with. God entrusts a man with a flock and instructs him to create disciples. Discipline is required by God of His children. However, God is not looking for a people who cower like abused dogs beaten with zealous, fundamentalist dogma exchanging the word of God for manmade rules giving an outward appearance of righteousness. God is looking for self-disciplined children who have been taught, exhorted, cajoled and coaxed into self-discipline. God’s children are not our children, and we must take great care in how we lead them to a disciplined life. The pastors are not their fathers but rather their teachers and guides. As one tries to instill self-discipline in other people’s children, one has two tools: the amount of time one spends with the child (more or less depending on the attitude and actions) and warnings as a form of attempted protection of the child and others. This is the frustration and this is the challenge of the pastor.
Thursday, December 16, 2004
When a person's ways are pleasing to the LORD, he makes even his enemies to be at peace with him. (Pro 16:7)
How displeased is the Lord with us? The church in general has very little peace. Backbiting, division and quarrels are the rule rather than the acceptations.
Conflict and confrontation will arise because we must progress as the Kingdom of God; however, when I find myself at war with another…or even not at peace…I must first examine myself and see whether or not I am pleasing the Lord. If I am, the other person, although he may hate me, will be at peace with me.
My wife, who teaches kindergarten, constantly experiences the fact that the most dedicated and loving parents are usually those who have had a strident conflict with her. It is in conflict, or war, when a true Christian’s colors show and peace is made. We often lament conflicts when perhaps it is the Lord bringing you or I opportunity to show forth His grace. How can we be peacemakers without bringing peace out of conflict? It’s no great feat to be a peacemaker at time of peace.
How displeased is the Lord with us? The church in general has very little peace. Backbiting, division and quarrels are the rule rather than the acceptations.
Conflict and confrontation will arise because we must progress as the Kingdom of God; however, when I find myself at war with another…or even not at peace…I must first examine myself and see whether or not I am pleasing the Lord. If I am, the other person, although he may hate me, will be at peace with me.
My wife, who teaches kindergarten, constantly experiences the fact that the most dedicated and loving parents are usually those who have had a strident conflict with her. It is in conflict, or war, when a true Christian’s colors show and peace is made. We often lament conflicts when perhaps it is the Lord bringing you or I opportunity to show forth His grace. How can we be peacemakers without bringing peace out of conflict? It’s no great feat to be a peacemaker at time of peace.
Thursday, December 09, 2004
A person with good sense is patient, and it is to his credit that he overlooks an offense. (Pro 19:11)
We all go through periods of growth when out soul grows a couple of inches in a few months, and I feel as though I’m in such a process right now. Unfortunately, my bones ache.
There are 4 areas of growth in my life right now. The first two of these God told me a couple of months ago would be my next two areas to conquer. God told me that until I conquer these two issues, I’d be stuck where I am. The fact that the Lord has moved two more items into my internal battle lets me know that I’m progressing.
1. Eating. I was tempted to call this “weight loss” or “physical discipline”, but the bottom line is that I need to discipline my eating habits. I’ve been on a campaign to eat what I need to…period. I certainly haven’t arrived; however, my average caloric intake has probably halved.
2. Money. I need to discipline my spending habits. I’ve worked to spend less and less each month. I’ve been paying down debt and investing more and more in retirement and the stock market.
3. Offence. I am ambivalent as I attempt to judge myself on this issue. A while back, I took offense over something that a person close to me did. I finally recognized it and dropped it about a week ago, but I feel like I have secretly taken offense over other things since then. I’ve perhaps used the excuse of trying to help people to bring up their offenses toward me in order to help them not do this toward someone else. I have felt clean and guilt free, but in retrospect, I’m not so sure. I guess I feel like offence is sort of sticking to me right now.
4. Purpose. I realize crystal clearly that my life and my family can not afford to just travel along anymore. I have to be purposed in everything that we do. We must trim away anything that doesn’t enhance the vision and mission of this family. The things we do must enhance our talents and abilities, and our purpose for being. This can be difficult because there are things that we currently do that we must cut off. Those people who count on us in those areas may not understand what I’m trying to do with this family.
We all go through periods of growth when out soul grows a couple of inches in a few months, and I feel as though I’m in such a process right now. Unfortunately, my bones ache.
There are 4 areas of growth in my life right now. The first two of these God told me a couple of months ago would be my next two areas to conquer. God told me that until I conquer these two issues, I’d be stuck where I am. The fact that the Lord has moved two more items into my internal battle lets me know that I’m progressing.
1. Eating. I was tempted to call this “weight loss” or “physical discipline”, but the bottom line is that I need to discipline my eating habits. I’ve been on a campaign to eat what I need to…period. I certainly haven’t arrived; however, my average caloric intake has probably halved.
2. Money. I need to discipline my spending habits. I’ve worked to spend less and less each month. I’ve been paying down debt and investing more and more in retirement and the stock market.
3. Offence. I am ambivalent as I attempt to judge myself on this issue. A while back, I took offense over something that a person close to me did. I finally recognized it and dropped it about a week ago, but I feel like I have secretly taken offense over other things since then. I’ve perhaps used the excuse of trying to help people to bring up their offenses toward me in order to help them not do this toward someone else. I have felt clean and guilt free, but in retrospect, I’m not so sure. I guess I feel like offence is sort of sticking to me right now.
4. Purpose. I realize crystal clearly that my life and my family can not afford to just travel along anymore. I have to be purposed in everything that we do. We must trim away anything that doesn’t enhance the vision and mission of this family. The things we do must enhance our talents and abilities, and our purpose for being. This can be difficult because there are things that we currently do that we must cut off. Those people who count on us in those areas may not understand what I’m trying to do with this family.
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
Joab…Part 2
I’ve been reading and meditating about Joab these last couple of weeks, and I see more and more clearly how his life, actions, and character apply to me. Just as I am the executive at Dexter Lake Church of God, so was Joab an executer of sorts for David, King of Israel (eventual king). Joab was David’s chief of the army, and probably his closest confidant and advisor. Here are a few of the lessons:
1. Above all else, Joab’s loyalty was totally above question. Joab could not have survived in his position without the complete trust of David, and one gets the feeling from the narrative that even if Joab was not always loyal and faithful to God, he was to David. This is evidenced, in part, in Joab’s jealous killing of Amasa and Sheba for rebellion.
2. Joab did not expose David’s weaknesses, faults or sins to others. Joab was a coverer of David’s faults rather than an exposer. Joab even set up Uriah to be killed as David had requested in order to cover David’s sin. This is an extreme example; however the pattern stands: Joab loyally protected David’s dignity.
3. Joab corrected David occasionally. Joab skillfully got David to see the light when he should have allowed Absalom to return after killing Amnon for the rape of Tamar. Joab didn’t just confront David, but he brought in a clever woman who played a role and helped the king to see the right decision. It is a difficult thing to know when is the right time to address the king in such a fashion.
4. Joab defied David’s orders when David’s emotions got in the way of clear judgement. Contrary to David’s orders, Joab outright killed Absalom in order to end the rebellion that nearly cost David the throne. Joab also blatantly confronted David in his mourning as well. This was a time of crisis and ultimate destinies were on the line from their perspective. Again, the sense of this correction though is that it was not an open and public rebuke, but a private correction in his home. This rebuke was for a blatant and destructive behavior: loving those who hate you and hating those who love you.
5. Joab refused glory to himself. In Rabbah, an Ammonite city, as well as other cities, Joab refused to complete the defeat, and would set David up for the final glorious push to capture the cities. Joab realized that his glory came through the king, not aside from the king.
6. Joab’s killing of Abner was a crisis in the relationship between Joab and David. Obviously Joab was wrong in killing Abner, or so it would appear. The king refused to cover Joab’s deed and refused to take any responsibility in it. The punishment was twofold. He made Joab mourn Abner’s death, and in making all Israel mourn he exposed Joab’s failure. When David says that a great man has fallen in Israel, it is perhaps a double-entendre as Joab has also fallen.
This is a difficult thing. Joab consistently covers David’s faults; however David specifically exposes Joab. Of course, the real diffuculty comes if Joab expects David to reciprocate his devotion and his reverence. The truth is that David is not in a position to do that without the crown being tarnished.
I think all of these have application and impact on my life and especially my relationship with the king I serve. I can only hope to someday learn to serve as Joab served.
I’ve been reading and meditating about Joab these last couple of weeks, and I see more and more clearly how his life, actions, and character apply to me. Just as I am the executive at Dexter Lake Church of God, so was Joab an executer of sorts for David, King of Israel (eventual king). Joab was David’s chief of the army, and probably his closest confidant and advisor. Here are a few of the lessons:
1. Above all else, Joab’s loyalty was totally above question. Joab could not have survived in his position without the complete trust of David, and one gets the feeling from the narrative that even if Joab was not always loyal and faithful to God, he was to David. This is evidenced, in part, in Joab’s jealous killing of Amasa and Sheba for rebellion.
2. Joab did not expose David’s weaknesses, faults or sins to others. Joab was a coverer of David’s faults rather than an exposer. Joab even set up Uriah to be killed as David had requested in order to cover David’s sin. This is an extreme example; however the pattern stands: Joab loyally protected David’s dignity.
3. Joab corrected David occasionally. Joab skillfully got David to see the light when he should have allowed Absalom to return after killing Amnon for the rape of Tamar. Joab didn’t just confront David, but he brought in a clever woman who played a role and helped the king to see the right decision. It is a difficult thing to know when is the right time to address the king in such a fashion.
4. Joab defied David’s orders when David’s emotions got in the way of clear judgement. Contrary to David’s orders, Joab outright killed Absalom in order to end the rebellion that nearly cost David the throne. Joab also blatantly confronted David in his mourning as well. This was a time of crisis and ultimate destinies were on the line from their perspective. Again, the sense of this correction though is that it was not an open and public rebuke, but a private correction in his home. This rebuke was for a blatant and destructive behavior: loving those who hate you and hating those who love you.
5. Joab refused glory to himself. In Rabbah, an Ammonite city, as well as other cities, Joab refused to complete the defeat, and would set David up for the final glorious push to capture the cities. Joab realized that his glory came through the king, not aside from the king.
6. Joab’s killing of Abner was a crisis in the relationship between Joab and David. Obviously Joab was wrong in killing Abner, or so it would appear. The king refused to cover Joab’s deed and refused to take any responsibility in it. The punishment was twofold. He made Joab mourn Abner’s death, and in making all Israel mourn he exposed Joab’s failure. When David says that a great man has fallen in Israel, it is perhaps a double-entendre as Joab has also fallen.
This is a difficult thing. Joab consistently covers David’s faults; however David specifically exposes Joab. Of course, the real diffuculty comes if Joab expects David to reciprocate his devotion and his reverence. The truth is that David is not in a position to do that without the crown being tarnished.
7. Finally, Joab questions David when David orders the census. However, Joab doesn't argue with David or press the point. He simply raises the concern and then fulfills his orders without complaint and with full expedience.
I think all of these have application and impact on my life and especially my relationship with the king I serve. I can only hope to someday learn to serve as Joab served.
Monday, November 29, 2004
The Lesson of Joab
Joab was the consummate right-hand-man of David, King of Israel. Joab was not only obedient, submissive, and loyal to David, but he counseled, even manipulated, David to do the right thing. I’m reminded of His trick put to David through the woman from Tekoa in 2 Samuel 14. Joab shows David that he should allow Absolom back into the country even though Absolom had murdered Amnon, his own half-brother who had raped Absolom’s full sister. Later, Joab actually kills Absolom in defiance of David’s order because it is needful to keep the kingdom together.
The most self-deferential act that I see Joab making was at the city of Rabbah. First, David has Joab send Uriah to the front line leading the attack and retreat from him in an open act of murder. Shortly thereafter, Joab sends word to David that he has captured the water supply to the city and it is ready to fall. Joab tells David to bring men and attack the city so that David takes it rather than Joab. Joab, knowing the ineptness of David and his pathetic rule over Israel…and even his recent sin…is submitted to the man that the Lord chose to rule. He is even dedicated to enhancing and advancing David with all his might.
How much can we prideful, self-righteous, malcontents learn from the successes of Joab? His loyalty was beyond question; therefore, he was a great counselor, warrior, and advocate for a man after God’s own heart.
Joab was the consummate right-hand-man of David, King of Israel. Joab was not only obedient, submissive, and loyal to David, but he counseled, even manipulated, David to do the right thing. I’m reminded of His trick put to David through the woman from Tekoa in 2 Samuel 14. Joab shows David that he should allow Absolom back into the country even though Absolom had murdered Amnon, his own half-brother who had raped Absolom’s full sister. Later, Joab actually kills Absolom in defiance of David’s order because it is needful to keep the kingdom together.
The most self-deferential act that I see Joab making was at the city of Rabbah. First, David has Joab send Uriah to the front line leading the attack and retreat from him in an open act of murder. Shortly thereafter, Joab sends word to David that he has captured the water supply to the city and it is ready to fall. Joab tells David to bring men and attack the city so that David takes it rather than Joab. Joab, knowing the ineptness of David and his pathetic rule over Israel…and even his recent sin…is submitted to the man that the Lord chose to rule. He is even dedicated to enhancing and advancing David with all his might.
How much can we prideful, self-righteous, malcontents learn from the successes of Joab? His loyalty was beyond question; therefore, he was a great counselor, warrior, and advocate for a man after God’s own heart.
Saturday, November 27, 2004
Lessons From the Deer
I hadn’t hunted in probably 15 years before this year, but I decided to get out and make time for it. When I was a kid, I was a kid, and consequently, I got my first deer ever last night. It was an average doe (probably 2 years old). I learned a couple of things from hunting…
1. It is always easier to endure hardship if there is an end in sight. I despise hunting in the morning, and it took me a while to realize that the reason was that I decide arbitrarily when I’m going to come in from the hunt. Every moment standing in the freezing cold is my own volition and I could just leave if I wanted to. In the evening, I know that eventually I have to come in. As it gets darker and darker, I can see the end approaching,,and I can endure that next 10 or 15 minutes.
This same phenomenon is true in other areas. I can endure the pain and shock of a doctor’s needle if I know it’s about to end. I can endure a horrible job or difficult circumstance if I can see the end in sight. It’s when there is no end in sight that man becomes hopeless and despondent.
2. There is something about actually killing a deer. I’ve hunted many times and for many different things. I’ve gotten many different types of game animals, but the deer is the largest thing I’ve ever killed. There is something of a feeling a greater responsibility or a rite of passage. It has a calming, foot grounding effect. Once in a while every man passes a point where he steps to a new kind of manhood. Those who don’t experience this remain children all their lives. These events might be a fight, a promotion, a lose, a death, a birthday or some other dramatic event. Women may grow up gradually, but men grow up in chunks. We mature in fits and starts.
I hadn’t hunted in probably 15 years before this year, but I decided to get out and make time for it. When I was a kid, I was a kid, and consequently, I got my first deer ever last night. It was an average doe (probably 2 years old). I learned a couple of things from hunting…
1. It is always easier to endure hardship if there is an end in sight. I despise hunting in the morning, and it took me a while to realize that the reason was that I decide arbitrarily when I’m going to come in from the hunt. Every moment standing in the freezing cold is my own volition and I could just leave if I wanted to. In the evening, I know that eventually I have to come in. As it gets darker and darker, I can see the end approaching,,and I can endure that next 10 or 15 minutes.
This same phenomenon is true in other areas. I can endure the pain and shock of a doctor’s needle if I know it’s about to end. I can endure a horrible job or difficult circumstance if I can see the end in sight. It’s when there is no end in sight that man becomes hopeless and despondent.
2. There is something about actually killing a deer. I’ve hunted many times and for many different things. I’ve gotten many different types of game animals, but the deer is the largest thing I’ve ever killed. There is something of a feeling a greater responsibility or a rite of passage. It has a calming, foot grounding effect. Once in a while every man passes a point where he steps to a new kind of manhood. Those who don’t experience this remain children all their lives. These events might be a fight, a promotion, a lose, a death, a birthday or some other dramatic event. Women may grow up gradually, but men grow up in chunks. We mature in fits and starts.
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Burned Good
This week I made a serious mistake which caused me to step back and evaluate the road I have been traveling. I received an email request from someone, and I forwarded the request to my boss with exceedingly frank comments regarding my opinion of the matter. A little later, I was checking my email and discovered that rather than forwarding the request to my boss I had replied to the requester’s original message. I was devastated.
There is always a need to be extra cordial in public, but sometimes this can lead to a duality in our lives. I looked back and saw a number of recent incidents where I was acting very cordial and non-confrontation to a person’s face, but behind the scenes I was anything from upset, disappointed to even brutally dismissive. I had spent time prejudging and even spreading my prejudices rather than simply going to the person in compassion and love and getting to the heart of the matter.
In my experience and observation, this seed of devilry never remains hidden for too long. Our true colors eventually come out. It is much better to govern our thoughts and tongues at all times…then we never have to worry about who we’re with or who we sent that email to.
I got burned…but there was a rose in it
This week I made a serious mistake which caused me to step back and evaluate the road I have been traveling. I received an email request from someone, and I forwarded the request to my boss with exceedingly frank comments regarding my opinion of the matter. A little later, I was checking my email and discovered that rather than forwarding the request to my boss I had replied to the requester’s original message. I was devastated.
There is always a need to be extra cordial in public, but sometimes this can lead to a duality in our lives. I looked back and saw a number of recent incidents where I was acting very cordial and non-confrontation to a person’s face, but behind the scenes I was anything from upset, disappointed to even brutally dismissive. I had spent time prejudging and even spreading my prejudices rather than simply going to the person in compassion and love and getting to the heart of the matter.
In my experience and observation, this seed of devilry never remains hidden for too long. Our true colors eventually come out. It is much better to govern our thoughts and tongues at all times…then we never have to worry about who we’re with or who we sent that email to.
I got burned…but there was a rose in it
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
DEATHBED CONVERSIONS
Then Jesus said to His disciples, If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life shall lose it, and whoever desires to lose his life for My sake shall find it. For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his works.
(Mat 16:24-27)
While it is impossible for you or I to know the true hearts of others, in fact, the Bible is clear that it is impossible to know even our own hearts, the issue of the deathbed conversion is problematic.
Obviously, the thief on the cross next to Jesus showed that people can truly turn to Christ in their dying hour, truly repent, truly believe, and truly be saved. However, the Bible as a whole is not a book of deathbed conversions. It is a book about laying down our lives for the gospel of Christ. It is about giving Christ complete lordship (control) over our lives.
The difficulty with the vast majority of deathbed conversions is that they are really a last minute attempt to save or salvage a person’s life. That motivation is particularly considered a brutal misuse of the gospel by Christ himself.
Christ is certainly not to be trifled with, and He will certainly not accept one who has presumed upon a deathbed conversion. If a person has intentionally reserved his whole life to himself and then tries to give the dying wreck to Christ right at the very end…if he has knowingly and intentionally done this…then I presume there is no hope of salvation.
What about the person who has heard the gospel multiple times throughout his life and has rejected it in favor of self determination and self rule each time. How can this person truly give up the rule of their life for the last few minutes to Christ and expect to be saved?
The thief on the cross had evidently never heard the gospel before that moment. Perhaps that is the key to this whole issue.
We may not know everything, but one thing is for certain:
“It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”
Then Jesus said to His disciples, If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life shall lose it, and whoever desires to lose his life for My sake shall find it. For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his works.
(Mat 16:24-27)
While it is impossible for you or I to know the true hearts of others, in fact, the Bible is clear that it is impossible to know even our own hearts, the issue of the deathbed conversion is problematic.
Obviously, the thief on the cross next to Jesus showed that people can truly turn to Christ in their dying hour, truly repent, truly believe, and truly be saved. However, the Bible as a whole is not a book of deathbed conversions. It is a book about laying down our lives for the gospel of Christ. It is about giving Christ complete lordship (control) over our lives.
The difficulty with the vast majority of deathbed conversions is that they are really a last minute attempt to save or salvage a person’s life. That motivation is particularly considered a brutal misuse of the gospel by Christ himself.
Christ is certainly not to be trifled with, and He will certainly not accept one who has presumed upon a deathbed conversion. If a person has intentionally reserved his whole life to himself and then tries to give the dying wreck to Christ right at the very end…if he has knowingly and intentionally done this…then I presume there is no hope of salvation.
What about the person who has heard the gospel multiple times throughout his life and has rejected it in favor of self determination and self rule each time. How can this person truly give up the rule of their life for the last few minutes to Christ and expect to be saved?
The thief on the cross had evidently never heard the gospel before that moment. Perhaps that is the key to this whole issue.
We may not know everything, but one thing is for certain:
“It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”
Saturday, September 25, 2004
Huxley and His "Brave New World" on "Island".
It’s been a while since I’ve written, probably because I haven’t read as much as I should have. I just finished Aldus Huxley’s “Island” (his last work) with the following comments:
Huxley, like all other idealists, is an advocate for a system of thought, a system of societal organization, and a system of economics which cannot credibly be anything less that a totalitarian, imposed and brutal system. Huxley likes to dress this pig up really pretty and spray lots of perfume on it, but it is simply an imposed system.
Huxley’s system (found on the island of Pala) is founded (according to him) on decency, liberty, and rational thought. However, the definitions of these are the definitions that Huxley creates. The island is one of free love and sexual openness as well as a restricted economy that stymies the entrepreneur. Drugs and contraceptives are openly free and available while the borders are closed and inaccessible. Children are removed from their parents and there is an elaborate system of instruction (or brainwashing) that goes on.
The problem of this whole system is that Huxley assumes that everyone would agree that this is the most decent, liberating and rational system. What if they don’t? He answers that with brainwashing.
Huxley hates the transcendent God giving us an epistemology. He wants to give the epistemology. The problem with this is that someone has to be God and impose the epistemology so that things actually work. Who’s it going to be?
Huxley’s system, even in his own books, always dies.
It’s been a while since I’ve written, probably because I haven’t read as much as I should have. I just finished Aldus Huxley’s “Island” (his last work) with the following comments:
Huxley, like all other idealists, is an advocate for a system of thought, a system of societal organization, and a system of economics which cannot credibly be anything less that a totalitarian, imposed and brutal system. Huxley likes to dress this pig up really pretty and spray lots of perfume on it, but it is simply an imposed system.
Huxley’s system (found on the island of Pala) is founded (according to him) on decency, liberty, and rational thought. However, the definitions of these are the definitions that Huxley creates. The island is one of free love and sexual openness as well as a restricted economy that stymies the entrepreneur. Drugs and contraceptives are openly free and available while the borders are closed and inaccessible. Children are removed from their parents and there is an elaborate system of instruction (or brainwashing) that goes on.
The problem of this whole system is that Huxley assumes that everyone would agree that this is the most decent, liberating and rational system. What if they don’t? He answers that with brainwashing.
Huxley hates the transcendent God giving us an epistemology. He wants to give the epistemology. The problem with this is that someone has to be God and impose the epistemology so that things actually work. Who’s it going to be?
Huxley’s system, even in his own books, always dies.
Monday, July 26, 2004
Big Mouth!
Ephesians 4:29
Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, that it may give grace to those who hear. NASB
Colossians 4:6
Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned, as it were, with salt, so that you may know how you should respond to each person. NASB
I guess that I should admit to being challenged by these two passages in scripture. Both are found in the middle of long lists of instructions to the saints on how they ought to act, and both are pretty clear about how we should speak. Let me lay out the strictest case here…
According to Ephesians, we are not to allow useless or unfit talk (or logos) to proceed out of our mouths, and according to Colossians we are to speak gracefully with speech or words that are influenced by God’s word. We gracefully speak the truth and abstain from worthless, idle, vain, or unfit speech.
As one who jokes around and frequently pushes the envelope on decency and appropriateness, I find this a challenge. I see where I must become much more circumspect in my speech. I must maintain balance though. I can joke around…so long as it is done with grace and seasoned with the salt of the Word.
Ephesians 4:29
Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, that it may give grace to those who hear. NASB
Colossians 4:6
Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned, as it were, with salt, so that you may know how you should respond to each person. NASB
I guess that I should admit to being challenged by these two passages in scripture. Both are found in the middle of long lists of instructions to the saints on how they ought to act, and both are pretty clear about how we should speak. Let me lay out the strictest case here…
According to Ephesians, we are not to allow useless or unfit talk (or logos) to proceed out of our mouths, and according to Colossians we are to speak gracefully with speech or words that are influenced by God’s word. We gracefully speak the truth and abstain from worthless, idle, vain, or unfit speech.
As one who jokes around and frequently pushes the envelope on decency and appropriateness, I find this a challenge. I see where I must become much more circumspect in my speech. I must maintain balance though. I can joke around…so long as it is done with grace and seasoned with the salt of the Word.
Monday, July 19, 2004
God is My Copilot
Today, I pulled up behind a truck that I think might have been red. It was hard to tell for all the religi-hype bumper stickers plastered on the back. One in particular caught my attention…God is my copilot!
Isn’t that the perfect example of modern evangelical drivel! God isn’t my pilot guiding me in every situation in life and navigating the dangers of life for me. No, God is my copilot. You know, God is the one that I call on when I get in trouble and need help. Otherwise, I am the pilot, and I can guide myself.
The sad truth is that most modern evangelicals live out a faith that looks just like the agnostic in action.
Today, I pulled up behind a truck that I think might have been red. It was hard to tell for all the religi-hype bumper stickers plastered on the back. One in particular caught my attention…God is my copilot!
Isn’t that the perfect example of modern evangelical drivel! God isn’t my pilot guiding me in every situation in life and navigating the dangers of life for me. No, God is my copilot. You know, God is the one that I call on when I get in trouble and need help. Otherwise, I am the pilot, and I can guide myself.
The sad truth is that most modern evangelicals live out a faith that looks just like the agnostic in action.
Saturday, July 17, 2004
To Have and to Hold
Something has been bothering me lately. This is something that I want to feel guilty for, but it I’m not sure that I can or that I should.
I know that my wife would do anything for me. She would follow me to any corner of the earth for any stupid idea I came up with, and she would endure all kinds of heartache for my sake. I see that she finds identity in me and through me, and she conforms to my requests in order to fulfill that. I recognize the influence I have over her, and it is hard to accept.
On the other hand, and this is what gets me; I would do what I felt my wife needed me to do…not anything she asked me to do. I would not follow her to any obscure place and I would not endure things that I didn’t feel she needed me to endure. I don’t conform to her requests (she has few), and I notice that she has far less external or overt influence over me than I over her.
I think this is Biblical and logical. I lead. She follows. I set the course. She helps fulfill the destiny. It makes perfect sense. But, when I think of it in terms of the death of one of us, I begin to see the differences between men and women come out.
I see women who die, who have a hard time remarrying. Their identity was through their husband and although he passed away his identity lives on inside of them. She still feels like Bob’s wife or John’s wife. Men react differently. They see their helpmeet leave, and they need another helpmeet. Usually, they get another helpmeet quickly…almost practically.
I’m not sure that the essence of what I’m trying to communicate is coming across. I feel like my wife holds the idea of me as her husband more sacred than I hold the idea of her as my wife. I’m dedicated to her. I love her with my whole heart, and I would mourn for her daily if she every passed on. But, on another level, the role of helpmeet needs to be fulfilled in my life by someone, and I’d need to find someone willing to fulfill it.
Something has been bothering me lately. This is something that I want to feel guilty for, but it I’m not sure that I can or that I should.
I know that my wife would do anything for me. She would follow me to any corner of the earth for any stupid idea I came up with, and she would endure all kinds of heartache for my sake. I see that she finds identity in me and through me, and she conforms to my requests in order to fulfill that. I recognize the influence I have over her, and it is hard to accept.
On the other hand, and this is what gets me; I would do what I felt my wife needed me to do…not anything she asked me to do. I would not follow her to any obscure place and I would not endure things that I didn’t feel she needed me to endure. I don’t conform to her requests (she has few), and I notice that she has far less external or overt influence over me than I over her.
I think this is Biblical and logical. I lead. She follows. I set the course. She helps fulfill the destiny. It makes perfect sense. But, when I think of it in terms of the death of one of us, I begin to see the differences between men and women come out.
I see women who die, who have a hard time remarrying. Their identity was through their husband and although he passed away his identity lives on inside of them. She still feels like Bob’s wife or John’s wife. Men react differently. They see their helpmeet leave, and they need another helpmeet. Usually, they get another helpmeet quickly…almost practically.
I’m not sure that the essence of what I’m trying to communicate is coming across. I feel like my wife holds the idea of me as her husband more sacred than I hold the idea of her as my wife. I’m dedicated to her. I love her with my whole heart, and I would mourn for her daily if she every passed on. But, on another level, the role of helpmeet needs to be fulfilled in my life by someone, and I’d need to find someone willing to fulfill it.
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
Oh…The Morality of it All!
I had someone I respect in many ways tell me recently that he wasn’t his vote wouldn’t be influenced by the issue of abortion because it is a personal decision and we can’t legislate morality anyway.
I was and have been amazed that intelligent people can say something so incredibly stupid. If we don’t legislate morality, what do we legislate? Logistics?
Every law that is passed, no…every bill introduced, has a moral base and is seeking to legislate morality. Every law regarding welfare, disability coverage, social security, subsidized housing…etc… assumes that we have a moral obligation to care for the poor and takes a particular moral view on how to do it. The USA Patriot Act took a moral stand on terrorism and each provision had a particular moral conviction as a base. Our defense budgets and policies are based on moral determinations of our responsibilities to protect our citizens as well as the innocent abroad. Immigration laws are based on our moral obligation to maintain a standard of living here as well as provide a haven for the oppressed. Even local laws such as zoning laws have a moral base. Zoning pits the moral obligation of allowing a property owner to rule his own property versus the right of the neighbors and the community to expect certain standards.
Morality permeates and undergirds everything. We say that we can’t legislate morality only when we are about to vote for someone wicked because we think they will advantage us in some way. This phrase is a code for abdication of responsibility and it is a prefix to our own wickedness.
I had someone I respect in many ways tell me recently that he wasn’t his vote wouldn’t be influenced by the issue of abortion because it is a personal decision and we can’t legislate morality anyway.
I was and have been amazed that intelligent people can say something so incredibly stupid. If we don’t legislate morality, what do we legislate? Logistics?
Every law that is passed, no…every bill introduced, has a moral base and is seeking to legislate morality. Every law regarding welfare, disability coverage, social security, subsidized housing…etc… assumes that we have a moral obligation to care for the poor and takes a particular moral view on how to do it. The USA Patriot Act took a moral stand on terrorism and each provision had a particular moral conviction as a base. Our defense budgets and policies are based on moral determinations of our responsibilities to protect our citizens as well as the innocent abroad. Immigration laws are based on our moral obligation to maintain a standard of living here as well as provide a haven for the oppressed. Even local laws such as zoning laws have a moral base. Zoning pits the moral obligation of allowing a property owner to rule his own property versus the right of the neighbors and the community to expect certain standards.
Morality permeates and undergirds everything. We say that we can’t legislate morality only when we are about to vote for someone wicked because we think they will advantage us in some way. This phrase is a code for abdication of responsibility and it is a prefix to our own wickedness.
Saturday, July 10, 2004
A Controversial Theory
What if we defined Christianity or our evidence of being Christian as these three things: not watching television, not eating sugar, and not using the internet. The reason for these three “don’ts” would be that clearly each of these can harm, damage or impair a person, and are not appropriate in excess. A true Christian would not even partake in something that can be destructive like that.
I wonder what the reaction would be to my putting that forward as a theory. People would probably argue that these things are not harmful is done in moderation, and while one might be able to make a Biblical argument against them by extension, they are certainly not forbidden activities.
The real reason that we would argue against this definition of proof of Christianity is cultural. There is no cultural stigma against TV, sugar and the internet. However, there is a cultural stigma against smoking, drinking and coarseness.
How often is our Christianity defined by smoking, drinking and how nice we are?
My point is not that we should all go out and start smoking, drinking and cussing. My point is that when we define what it means to be a Christian by anything other than strict Biblical evidences we do two things. First, we limit the appeal of the gospel because of the false requirements on the Christian. Second, we create false Christians who think they are saved because they meet the false requirements.
What if we defined Christianity or our evidence of being Christian as these three things: not watching television, not eating sugar, and not using the internet. The reason for these three “don’ts” would be that clearly each of these can harm, damage or impair a person, and are not appropriate in excess. A true Christian would not even partake in something that can be destructive like that.
I wonder what the reaction would be to my putting that forward as a theory. People would probably argue that these things are not harmful is done in moderation, and while one might be able to make a Biblical argument against them by extension, they are certainly not forbidden activities.
The real reason that we would argue against this definition of proof of Christianity is cultural. There is no cultural stigma against TV, sugar and the internet. However, there is a cultural stigma against smoking, drinking and coarseness.
How often is our Christianity defined by smoking, drinking and how nice we are?
My point is not that we should all go out and start smoking, drinking and cussing. My point is that when we define what it means to be a Christian by anything other than strict Biblical evidences we do two things. First, we limit the appeal of the gospel because of the false requirements on the Christian. Second, we create false Christians who think they are saved because they meet the false requirements.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)