With the current unemployment rate reaching a 15 year high at 7.2 % as of January 2009, according to Wallstats.com, I begin to think I'm not alone. Although, needless to say, this does little to assuage the pain of being unable to accomplish everyday tasks such as paying bills, putting food on the table, and purchasing my morning Starbucks. Having found myself in an economy that is rapidly disintegrating, despite what the positive-thinking economist being paid to make us feel better say, I find myself searching beyond the stats, the figures, and the national news broadcasts for answers.
I moved to northern Minnesota about 5 months ago, and despite applying to over two dozen businesses, I have yet to land anything promising, having had a mere two interviews following the submissions of my resumes. Again, I am forced to look through the circumstances, because if I don't I fear I may falter. I have chosen to place my trust, ever more resolutely, in the God who has the "cattle on a thousand hills." (Psalm 50:10) Perhaps, He would need some help on His farm? After all, He did say that the "harvest is ready, but the laborers are few."(Lk 10:2) Though some may claim this as a fall back, I make the argument that, indeed, it should be our first choice for employment. Meaning, that if we claim to truly trust God to provide, to take care of His children, should we not first be seeking how to play our part in helping bring in the great harvest? We must believe that if we pursue what should be of primary concern, our needs will be met. This is not to say that we abandon all hope of employment by this worlds employers, for we are told to be good stewards, and are also informed that if we do not provide for our families we are "worse than unbelievers." (1 Tim. 5:8) However, while we continue to pursue to be godly men through employment, we must maintain our focus on that which is truly rewarding, the employment of soul-winning.
This has never been more clear, to me, than now. It is sad that it has taken this extreme position of desperation, but there it is. As so often noted, it is simply when we have no lower to fall that we finally look upwards. Graciously, our God is merciful, and is willing, indeed, even desiring, that we return to our labor no matter the circumstances in which we finally make that appeal to be involved in His service.
So, the question is what may we do while constantly pursuing "worldly" employment, to become a part of Christ's staff? I would say that we must return to the Employers' handbook to get our start. The beauty of this company, is that while it gives directions to be greatly heeded, it provides the freedom for us to implement the instruction through various means of our choosing. As far as I see it, the first command given is to "go and make disciples..."(Matt. 28:19). Again, a principle is given, and it is left up to us to figure out the means by which we may help accomplish this end. For many years the general consensus regarding this command was practiced by training, funding, and sending people to far away countries to become involved in a distant culture. While this is still greatly needed, for all need to hear the "benefits" that our "employer" offers, often the best market into which we may begin is our very own block, neighborhood, city. Initially told to begin in Jerusalem and them move beyond (acts 1:8), we may adopt this method for ourselves. In my opinion, one of our primary objectives must be to become actively involved the local "branch" of the universal "company", the local expression of the universal church. Why is this so important? According to Joshua Harris it is "...because as the visible "body of Christ" in the world, the local church is central to God's plan for every generation" (Stop Dating the Church, Multnomah Pub,2004) Simply stated, our local church is the neighborhood example of what the universal church represents. Though this may be a scary for some, considering the great blunders, mishaps, and outright sins that the universal church has been guilty of in the past, if we hope to have any impact within our new "company", we must embrace the quirks, the faults, and oddities of our local church and do our part to remain faithful to the first order of business, the making of disciples. Some may find a strong distaste in their mouth left from bad past church experiences, hesitant to get involved, though the importance of actually being involved in a local church has never been more accurately stated than by Charles Spurgeon when he said, "I know there are some who say, 'Well, I have given myself to the Lord, but I do not intend to give myself to the church...because I can be a Christian without it. Are you quite clear about that? You can be as good a Christian by disobedience to your Lord's commands as by being obedient? What is a brick made for? To help build a house. It is of no use for that brick to tell you that it is just as good a brick while it is kicking about on the ground as it would be in the house. It is a good-for-nothing brick."
As good employees, it behooves us to not be a "good-for-nothing brick". Because there is much need for our "CEO's" words to be declared everywhere, and because we cannot be everywhere, we must make these words known by living faithfully and truly where we are at. Right now. The importance of this cannot be overstated. You and I must be involved in the local expression of the universal church, and we must remain faithful to the decree to make disciples. As this is our primary term of employment in Christ's work, will you join me in making it a priority? I hope you do...
7.14.2009
Initial Thoughts Regarding Worship and the Regulative Principle
The other day I was privileged to be informed of the possibility of joining a group of church leaders and laypersons in a local discussion seeking to better understand and incorporate what is known as "intergenerational worship" into the local churches. The purpose is to discover, biblically, which direction these churches should go, in an attempt to set themselves up for success in the near future. If I am able to be in the area when this group begins to meet in a month or so, I would gladly join them, as it is something that is most desperately needed in this area. As a rural area, the local churches tend to be either traditional and institutional or contemporary and evangelical. I have yet to see any emerging and missional churches in the area, mostly due to the population and demographics. Deciding that if I am to be able to join them, I began studying the thoughts that are surely to be raised. If I understand the initial propositions of the group, the study is the begin with the topic of "Singing Worship." Although, the discussion group is to be primarily discussing this aspect of Church Service Structure, I think it important to fully define the term "worship" since the element of "Singing Worship" is merely a facet of the whole. Understanding the definition of the whole will better provide clarity for the individual facets.
"15Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. 16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God." (Heb. 13: 15-16) Indicating that worship involves both adoration and action, a starting point for our understanding of true worship must include the concession that said worship must include both, they may not be separated. Although terms such as "Worship Service", "Worship Time", etc. are prevalent, they are, I believe, misnomers, as they seem to indicate that true worship has a timeline, a time limit, a beginning and an end. Many may say, and ,indeed, have stated that worship is not just "something you do, but rather something you are." I believe many would agree that worship is a lifestyle, not simply the hour we gather together for "church." True Worship includes both the times when we gather as a corporate assembly (Heb. 10:24-25) but also when we as a body scatter for witnessing, or more commonly, scattering to live our own lives (1 Cor. 10:31). It is something that envelopes all our time, surrounding our entire life, not merely the times spent corporately gathered.
“We cannot imagine that the church gathers for worship on Sunday morning if by this we mean that we then engage in something that we have not been engaging in the rest of the week. New covenant worship terminology prescribes constant ‘worship’” - Dr. D.A. Carson (Worship by the Book 2002, 24).
Not only is worship then defined by existing throughout our entire day, but it's also placed under the terms that God has deemed acceptable to Him, positions that are allowed, aspects that are pleasing to Him. It is evidently important to God that we worship according to His words, both through proper external methods as well as having correct internal motivations. In Scripture we see God judging those who have sinfully brought detestable forms of external worship (Lev. 10:1-2; Ezek. 8-9) and those who have had impure hearts (Gen. 4; Isa. 1:11-17; Jer. 7:9-10; Mic. 6:6-8). We know that Cain's offering was unacceptable due not necessarily to improper methodology but rather due to the internal condition of his heart. As several are struck dead by God when coming forward sinfully, it would seem that the matter of true worship is indeed a priority.
Now there are several elements of worship that appear biblically prescribed for the corporate church gathering those being: 1) Preaching (2 Tim. 4:2); 2) Lord's Table (1 Cor. 11:17-34); 3) Prayer (1 Tim 2:1); 4) Reading Scripture (1 Tim 4:13); 5) Financial Giving (2 Cor. 8-9); 6) Singing and Music (Col 3:16). Though there are these commanded orders for a church to abide by, there is no mention of a methodology or a practice form to follow. Along with silence in Scripture, we have not been provided, as of yet, an example of early, 1st century church liturgy. Because of the lack of example, the question naturally arises of whether or not elements not mentioned in Scripture are to be incorporated into the Church gathering. Some of these elements include creeds, special music, music style, service order, length, time, seating, technology, instruments, announcements, architecture, and clothing. These are objects which must be held against Scripture and decided upon with the assistance of conscience, the Holy Spirit and common sense, the latter which is provided us through common grace. Two trains of thought have emerged in an attempt to answer these very important questions. These have come to be known as, or defined as, either the "Normative" or "Regulative" Principles.
The Normative Principle holds that Corporate church worship services must include all the elements that Scripture commands and may include others so long as they are not prohibited by Scripture. So, that what is prescribed in Scripture must be adhered to, while what is forbidden must be rejected, and anything that falls in the between may be permissible.
The Regulative Principle holds that Corporate church worship services must include all the elements that Scripture commands or are a good and necessary implication of a biblical text and nothing more. So, that the prescribed elements are the only items that a church may implement, anything beyond what is strictly mentioned is forbidden.
There are several "pro's and con's" to each argument, the positives for the Normative being that it shows that the Bible provides principles not methods, for the truths must span generations and people groups. (i.e the Bible says sing, but does not tell us how, what language, what form, etc.), it also allows for cultural contextualization (extending the gospel in a method most fitting for the current culture, NOT that one changes doctrine and truths, but simply adjusts the shapes in which this truth comes out), it also considers both "gathered" and "scattered" worship the same. (It is most curious that some will act under one set of rules come Sunday morning, but live by another set of rules the other 6 and a half days of the week! Real life is lived under freedom, not legalistic regulation. We must live our whole lives consistently, faithfully, both for the evidence of truth in our lives to others, as well as for our spiritual health, not pluralistically.) Some weaknesses are evident though, and we must be aware of these possibilities in order to stay faithful to God's Word. These weakness are that it may allow too much, leading to pagan syncretism, it can also make our enjoyment rather than God's glory the priority, it may also elevate unbiblical element thereby pushing out true, biblical elements (such as man-made events like drama, skits, poetry, art. If these cut into the time given for true biblical practices like Scripture reading, Prayer, Lord's Table, etc., then the former must go.)
Some positives are certainly found in the Regulative as well, those include: seeking to define worship by God and His Word, not by us and our words, it also really, honestly seeks to glorify God, even if only in theory, and finally it also gives a strong delineation between the church and "the world", that is syncretism and paganism are definitely not allowed. Though the line may be a little too strong at times, it does a great job at staying faithful to what God says. Some weaknesses to be conscious of are that the Regulative does tend to differentiate between the "gathered" and the "scattered" forms of worship (as though upon walking into the church, you are ruled by a different set of rules than when you stepped out of your car in the parking lot. As though Jesus is not "ruler over all"), it also is not adequate in answering all questions such as what to do with technology, seating, announcements, it also can be legalistically applied such as stating that "we do not allow instruments" or even only certain instruments like the organ, when the Bible is rife with instruments, God, Himself, hands out harps upon our entrance to heaven. Now it is obvious that there are "hard" and "soft" Regulativists, and when the "hard" regulativists state that they are "just being biblical", one must wonder what they do with verses stating that it is proper for the raising of hands in worship, clapping, the lifting of hands by men during prayer, singing a "new song", etc.
For my initial response to these arguments, I would state that both are needed. The church is to be Regulative in that it must remain faithful to the Word of God, it must draw a firm line between pagan and foreign concepts being allowed to enter the church, however the church, I believe should embrace the positive Normative principles as well. That is that we as the church are ordered to "become all things to all people in all time, in order that we might save some." The Normative allows for this, providing a context in which to be culturally relevant, while holding tight to the truth of the biblical commands for the Church. Another strong benefit that is desperately needed in the church, is the erasing of distinction between "gathered" and "scattered" worship, that is that we must live with consistency, that we should see Christ as Lord over all our lives, not solely for an hour a week. Living by His rules and commands extends to our every breath, minutes, and life.
As mentioned in the title, this is merely my initial thoughts sprung from the brief study I have conducted so far. I plan on digging into this topic further as time progresses. Let me close with a quote that I find extremely helpful in our attempt to define worship, embracing both the Regulative and the Normative.
"All of Christian Life is ceaseless worship of God the Father through the mediatiorship of God the Son by the indwelling power of the God the Spirit; doing what God commands in Scripture, not doing what God forbids in Scripture, in culturally contextualized ways for the furtherance of the gospel when both gathered together for adoration and scattered for action, in joyous response to glorious grace." -Mark Driscoll.
-BS
(credits to studied topics belong to Pastor Mark Driscoll (Mars Hill Church, Seattle.) Dr. D. A. Carson "Worship by the Book", and John M. Frame ("Worship in Spirit and Truth", "A Fresh Look at the Regulative Principle", "Some Questions About the Regulative Principle"), and Harold M. Best "Unceasing Worship". )
"15Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. 16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God." (Heb. 13: 15-16) Indicating that worship involves both adoration and action, a starting point for our understanding of true worship must include the concession that said worship must include both, they may not be separated. Although terms such as "Worship Service", "Worship Time", etc. are prevalent, they are, I believe, misnomers, as they seem to indicate that true worship has a timeline, a time limit, a beginning and an end. Many may say, and ,indeed, have stated that worship is not just "something you do, but rather something you are." I believe many would agree that worship is a lifestyle, not simply the hour we gather together for "church." True Worship includes both the times when we gather as a corporate assembly (Heb. 10:24-25) but also when we as a body scatter for witnessing, or more commonly, scattering to live our own lives (1 Cor. 10:31). It is something that envelopes all our time, surrounding our entire life, not merely the times spent corporately gathered.
“We cannot imagine that the church gathers for worship on Sunday morning if by this we mean that we then engage in something that we have not been engaging in the rest of the week. New covenant worship terminology prescribes constant ‘worship’” - Dr. D.A. Carson (Worship by the Book 2002, 24).
Not only is worship then defined by existing throughout our entire day, but it's also placed under the terms that God has deemed acceptable to Him, positions that are allowed, aspects that are pleasing to Him. It is evidently important to God that we worship according to His words, both through proper external methods as well as having correct internal motivations. In Scripture we see God judging those who have sinfully brought detestable forms of external worship (Lev. 10:1-2; Ezek. 8-9) and those who have had impure hearts (Gen. 4; Isa. 1:11-17; Jer. 7:9-10; Mic. 6:6-8). We know that Cain's offering was unacceptable due not necessarily to improper methodology but rather due to the internal condition of his heart. As several are struck dead by God when coming forward sinfully, it would seem that the matter of true worship is indeed a priority.
Now there are several elements of worship that appear biblically prescribed for the corporate church gathering those being: 1) Preaching (2 Tim. 4:2); 2) Lord's Table (1 Cor. 11:17-34); 3) Prayer (1 Tim 2:1); 4) Reading Scripture (1 Tim 4:13); 5) Financial Giving (2 Cor. 8-9); 6) Singing and Music (Col 3:16). Though there are these commanded orders for a church to abide by, there is no mention of a methodology or a practice form to follow. Along with silence in Scripture, we have not been provided, as of yet, an example of early, 1st century church liturgy. Because of the lack of example, the question naturally arises of whether or not elements not mentioned in Scripture are to be incorporated into the Church gathering. Some of these elements include creeds, special music, music style, service order, length, time, seating, technology, instruments, announcements, architecture, and clothing. These are objects which must be held against Scripture and decided upon with the assistance of conscience, the Holy Spirit and common sense, the latter which is provided us through common grace. Two trains of thought have emerged in an attempt to answer these very important questions. These have come to be known as, or defined as, either the "Normative" or "Regulative" Principles.
The Normative Principle holds that Corporate church worship services must include all the elements that Scripture commands and may include others so long as they are not prohibited by Scripture. So, that what is prescribed in Scripture must be adhered to, while what is forbidden must be rejected, and anything that falls in the between may be permissible.
The Regulative Principle holds that Corporate church worship services must include all the elements that Scripture commands or are a good and necessary implication of a biblical text and nothing more. So, that the prescribed elements are the only items that a church may implement, anything beyond what is strictly mentioned is forbidden.
There are several "pro's and con's" to each argument, the positives for the Normative being that it shows that the Bible provides principles not methods, for the truths must span generations and people groups. (i.e the Bible says sing, but does not tell us how, what language, what form, etc.), it also allows for cultural contextualization (extending the gospel in a method most fitting for the current culture, NOT that one changes doctrine and truths, but simply adjusts the shapes in which this truth comes out), it also considers both "gathered" and "scattered" worship the same. (It is most curious that some will act under one set of rules come Sunday morning, but live by another set of rules the other 6 and a half days of the week! Real life is lived under freedom, not legalistic regulation. We must live our whole lives consistently, faithfully, both for the evidence of truth in our lives to others, as well as for our spiritual health, not pluralistically.) Some weaknesses are evident though, and we must be aware of these possibilities in order to stay faithful to God's Word. These weakness are that it may allow too much, leading to pagan syncretism, it can also make our enjoyment rather than God's glory the priority, it may also elevate unbiblical element thereby pushing out true, biblical elements (such as man-made events like drama, skits, poetry, art. If these cut into the time given for true biblical practices like Scripture reading, Prayer, Lord's Table, etc., then the former must go.)
Some positives are certainly found in the Regulative as well, those include: seeking to define worship by God and His Word, not by us and our words, it also really, honestly seeks to glorify God, even if only in theory, and finally it also gives a strong delineation between the church and "the world", that is syncretism and paganism are definitely not allowed. Though the line may be a little too strong at times, it does a great job at staying faithful to what God says. Some weaknesses to be conscious of are that the Regulative does tend to differentiate between the "gathered" and the "scattered" forms of worship (as though upon walking into the church, you are ruled by a different set of rules than when you stepped out of your car in the parking lot. As though Jesus is not "ruler over all"), it also is not adequate in answering all questions such as what to do with technology, seating, announcements, it also can be legalistically applied such as stating that "we do not allow instruments" or even only certain instruments like the organ, when the Bible is rife with instruments, God, Himself, hands out harps upon our entrance to heaven. Now it is obvious that there are "hard" and "soft" Regulativists, and when the "hard" regulativists state that they are "just being biblical", one must wonder what they do with verses stating that it is proper for the raising of hands in worship, clapping, the lifting of hands by men during prayer, singing a "new song", etc.
For my initial response to these arguments, I would state that both are needed. The church is to be Regulative in that it must remain faithful to the Word of God, it must draw a firm line between pagan and foreign concepts being allowed to enter the church, however the church, I believe should embrace the positive Normative principles as well. That is that we as the church are ordered to "become all things to all people in all time, in order that we might save some." The Normative allows for this, providing a context in which to be culturally relevant, while holding tight to the truth of the biblical commands for the Church. Another strong benefit that is desperately needed in the church, is the erasing of distinction between "gathered" and "scattered" worship, that is that we must live with consistency, that we should see Christ as Lord over all our lives, not solely for an hour a week. Living by His rules and commands extends to our every breath, minutes, and life.
As mentioned in the title, this is merely my initial thoughts sprung from the brief study I have conducted so far. I plan on digging into this topic further as time progresses. Let me close with a quote that I find extremely helpful in our attempt to define worship, embracing both the Regulative and the Normative.
"All of Christian Life is ceaseless worship of God the Father through the mediatiorship of God the Son by the indwelling power of the God the Spirit; doing what God commands in Scripture, not doing what God forbids in Scripture, in culturally contextualized ways for the furtherance of the gospel when both gathered together for adoration and scattered for action, in joyous response to glorious grace." -Mark Driscoll.
-BS
(credits to studied topics belong to Pastor Mark Driscoll (Mars Hill Church, Seattle.) Dr. D. A. Carson "Worship by the Book", and John M. Frame ("Worship in Spirit and Truth", "A Fresh Look at the Regulative Principle", "Some Questions About the Regulative Principle"), and Harold M. Best "Unceasing Worship". )
7.03.2009
Beauty and True Sight (from the journals)
It is all thought provoking, this thing of Beauty. It is all at once physical, external, sensual, and yet, there is some point of it all that touches inside, internally. I know it must be our recognition of that which is greater, beyond ourselves. Surely, for such beauty to move us there must be a reason, and what would cause us to turn away from our pursuit of knowing this?
How dastardly and ugly is sinful flesh that would make us "love darkness rather than light." How completely dark it must be, how incapable are our eyes that we would blink and turn? I know the argument that in order for one to appreciate fully that which is beautiful there must be a thing that is dark and ugly. We are not able to note beauty unless there is a foil to hold against it. Yet, how was it that at first creation man and woman saw it all as perfectly good? Was it, perhaps, not that there was a dark force contrasting the light, but rather a purer light through which it was all viewed?
The light that is to light all the world in the end must surely have been there at the beginning. Perhaps, this light is the only filter we truly need. Does this life-light provide for us the vision to see it all as beautiful? The light that must emanate from the One who "was and is and is to come", the glow from this Holy must be so pure and true that we crave to know it just from our taste of beauty we find on earth, now. What must the world have looked like for the first humans, the ones who had this light even in front of them, walking side by side in "the cool of the day." And how terribly clever and awful is the enemy that he may deceive even those with this perfect sight?
I shudder to think of the change in tones, colors, perceptions and understanding that came with the fall. I do not blame them for hiding, not wanting to show their strange, now seemingly disfigured bodies to the very One who purposed their existence. I suppose this is a partial answer to why we "all fall short", why we love "darkness rather than light" for deep down, despite what intellects say, we are broken, torn, marred. We wish not to be seen. How I long for the day when we are all renewed, restored to a place of old. A day where we can once again see that which is truly beautiful, perceiving the creation at is was purely meant to be.
How dastardly and ugly is sinful flesh that would make us "love darkness rather than light." How completely dark it must be, how incapable are our eyes that we would blink and turn? I know the argument that in order for one to appreciate fully that which is beautiful there must be a thing that is dark and ugly. We are not able to note beauty unless there is a foil to hold against it. Yet, how was it that at first creation man and woman saw it all as perfectly good? Was it, perhaps, not that there was a dark force contrasting the light, but rather a purer light through which it was all viewed?
The light that is to light all the world in the end must surely have been there at the beginning. Perhaps, this light is the only filter we truly need. Does this life-light provide for us the vision to see it all as beautiful? The light that must emanate from the One who "was and is and is to come", the glow from this Holy must be so pure and true that we crave to know it just from our taste of beauty we find on earth, now. What must the world have looked like for the first humans, the ones who had this light even in front of them, walking side by side in "the cool of the day." And how terribly clever and awful is the enemy that he may deceive even those with this perfect sight?
I shudder to think of the change in tones, colors, perceptions and understanding that came with the fall. I do not blame them for hiding, not wanting to show their strange, now seemingly disfigured bodies to the very One who purposed their existence. I suppose this is a partial answer to why we "all fall short", why we love "darkness rather than light" for deep down, despite what intellects say, we are broken, torn, marred. We wish not to be seen. How I long for the day when we are all renewed, restored to a place of old. A day where we can once again see that which is truly beautiful, perceiving the creation at is was purely meant to be.
***
How lovely it will be when I am in heaven, or with my Saviour for many reasons, but one in particular. This is not a unique reason, nor is it original thought, for if you were to ask this of most any believer they would state the same. I so desire the understanding to provide an answer for why.
As I sit now in my life, I do not, nor will I ever fully know the "why's" of it all, and I, indeed, try to focus rather on the "how." That is "How" this can be used for my sanctification. Once I am in a place of being able to stand while being given the answer, I long to know why life is the way it is. Why have I made my sinful decisions when I knew full well that they were causing me to depart from the Way. Why did my love leave? Why has this life caused so much heart-ache? Why has life allowed the separation of my daughter and myself?
It is one thing to "know" or have a "knowledge" of life such as the finite understanding of a sovereign God, a faith that holds onto that which I can never fully grasp. But, if possible, I want to know the purpose, the plan behind it all, as it were. I suppose it is a thought that it is all for me, that is that these are lessons to set me in a proper place of Sanctification, which is fine. I wonder at the union than of a Father and his child.
If these life lessons are training tools for me, the father, where does it come into play for the benefit of the daughter? Of course, I have yet to fully live out my life, and this may still be answered, but it would be a lie to say it does not affect me now. It is so difficult to understand it's purpose right at this moment.
I do not mean to complain, for many great things have come to be for me, in my life. If it all allows my to serve my God by better means, than it is worth it. If it brings about salvation for others I know it is good. I also know that the best I can do is to set myself in a position of walking properly with my Saviour, and this I am attempting to do, but it does not much to make me wonder at the plan for my little Jersie. Perhaps, it is not how I should think, but I cannot help myself. I think almost every hour of my love, my daughter.
Love songs have taken on a new message, not for me and a woman, but for me and THE WOMAN, my Jersie.
Is this odd? She has become my whole love. Short of my allegiance to my Lord, she is my purpose, my reason, my life.
I hate the feeling that must come from the enemy, that I am not a good father, that I am not doing enough. I loathe this feeling. I pray that this feeling will leave, that God would occupy my mind in order that I would know and even feel that I am doing my all. I desire so much to be with her, and I know that my separation is not my fault. Even this is a thought spread by the destroyer, the accuser. I must not give in. It was not my doing, my will or desire....
Wimbledon on my mind
Ok, not very deep here, but it's fair to say that I'm very excited about the Championships Wimbledon tournaments going on right now, so I thought I would blog about it. I was shocked today when Andy Roddick pulled out an amazing win over Andy Murray in the semi's today. I was rooting for him, though I had my doubts as Murray is such a quick and intelligent player. I guess dropping 15 lbs does the job for one's game, as Roddick snagged the win in the tie break in the fourth set. I was excited, running around the house, yelling "Roddick wins, Roddick wins!"
Yes, I take great joy in little things.
I am very much looking forward to the finals on Sunday, Roddick versus Roger Federer. We shall see if Roddick can grab a W with his 2-18 record against Fed. I have mixed emotions about the outcome as I love Roddick, but would also be excited to see Federer pull out a history making, 1st place all-time 15 Slam wins, with another Wimbledon Championship.
Do you think God will forgive me if I miss church just this once? hmmmm....
Yes, I take great joy in little things.
I am very much looking forward to the finals on Sunday, Roddick versus Roger Federer. We shall see if Roddick can grab a W with his 2-18 record against Fed. I have mixed emotions about the outcome as I love Roddick, but would also be excited to see Federer pull out a history making, 1st place all-time 15 Slam wins, with another Wimbledon Championship.
Do you think God will forgive me if I miss church just this once? hmmmm....
5.22.2009
Sovereignty Updated- Thoughts from Ruth 1
So, as things progress and the conclusion to the collusion comes closer I have found that throughout my exploration of God and His sovereignty there is, in fact, one thing that must be mentioned in conjunction. That is that we must believe that God is not just sovereign, which He is, but that we must likewise know that God is good. I have found that we dare not attempt to simply hold on to one idea while throwing the other out the window, for if we do we harm ourselves by placing our knowledge and even faith of God in a very insufficient and dangerous location. If one decides that God is sovereign but that God is not good, for how could such a loving God allow all the evil that is present, then they will know God is in control, that He is above all, that He rules and reigns, but they will indeed think that God is cruel, that He is unjust, and that He is mean and capricious. My hope is that it goes without saying that this is a most fine line to walk upon. Likewise, if one holds to the goodness of God, but not the sovereignty, one opens themselves up to odd theologies, becoming an open theist. They may believe that God is good, that He is loving, kind, patient, forgiving, but they will assume that God is just as surprised as we are when tragedy strikes, that He was not aware of what was to happen. There is no thought that God can intervene if He desires, that God has no ultimate control on the outcome, and that, my friends, is a very scary thought.
Even with the knowledge that God is sovereign that He can intervene in any circumstance, because He is the sovereign He can do as He pleases; this does not negate the goodness of God, rather it magnifies it. In God's own self-disclosure of Himself in Exodus 34 we find that God states that He is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands and forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin.
We must not allow ourselves to get to a place of folly of bitterness so much so that we are not able to see our difficulties as, not necessarily coming from the hand of God, because I do not believe that God causes trials and troubles, but we may rightly surmise that everything must at least pass through the hand of God. That is to say that if we believe in the providence of God, the providential hand of God, than we may acknowledge an affliction, as Puritan John Flavel would state, as a "sanctifying affliction." I feel this is one thing that may be grossly overlooked, when we as the body of Christ have become so consumed with health and wealth and living for great relationships.
While these are certainly not bad things, nor am I condemning any who may have these, the issue arises when we place these as indicators set to mark out the level of spirituality we have attained. We see from the life of Christ that even though you may be perfect, sinless, it by no means indicates that we are guaranteed a life of health, wealth and prosperous relationships.
As I mentioned in a previous post, it seems that often we throw the question of why up to God when things get rough, things get hard. This is certainly an example of honesty which I greatly praise and desire for all. The question that God desires to be hand in hand with an upset, honest heart is that of how. How may these difficulties be used to sanctify me, to allow me to love God more deeply, to obey Him more readily? For as believers we have much affliction, but we may choose to acknowledge that it is a sanctifying affliction. This changes the persepective vastly.
May be we be honest as Naomi finds herself, though she is bitter at God, she is seeing God as foe not friend, she is honest with herself, with the people of God and most importantly with God. Because, as we see in verse 8, Naomi prays the prayer of Hassad upon her daughters in law. She knows deep down that her God is a god of Hassad, that He is indeed both sovereign and good. She believes that the ultimate outcome will be a Rom. 8:28 conclusion because it is all set to sanctify, to reunite and to restore.
I find myself taking the example of Naomi, desiring to be honest with myself, the people of God and, of course, God, Himself. I am in the process of seeing not only the over all, ultimate reign of the sovereign, but also that just as important, indeed, acting as the shadow of the sovereign is the goodness of a great and loving God. Because God is not just sovereign, He is good.
-BS
Even with the knowledge that God is sovereign that He can intervene in any circumstance, because He is the sovereign He can do as He pleases; this does not negate the goodness of God, rather it magnifies it. In God's own self-disclosure of Himself in Exodus 34 we find that God states that He is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands and forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin.
We must not allow ourselves to get to a place of folly of bitterness so much so that we are not able to see our difficulties as, not necessarily coming from the hand of God, because I do not believe that God causes trials and troubles, but we may rightly surmise that everything must at least pass through the hand of God. That is to say that if we believe in the providence of God, the providential hand of God, than we may acknowledge an affliction, as Puritan John Flavel would state, as a "sanctifying affliction." I feel this is one thing that may be grossly overlooked, when we as the body of Christ have become so consumed with health and wealth and living for great relationships.
While these are certainly not bad things, nor am I condemning any who may have these, the issue arises when we place these as indicators set to mark out the level of spirituality we have attained. We see from the life of Christ that even though you may be perfect, sinless, it by no means indicates that we are guaranteed a life of health, wealth and prosperous relationships.
As I mentioned in a previous post, it seems that often we throw the question of why up to God when things get rough, things get hard. This is certainly an example of honesty which I greatly praise and desire for all. The question that God desires to be hand in hand with an upset, honest heart is that of how. How may these difficulties be used to sanctify me, to allow me to love God more deeply, to obey Him more readily? For as believers we have much affliction, but we may choose to acknowledge that it is a sanctifying affliction. This changes the persepective vastly.
May be we be honest as Naomi finds herself, though she is bitter at God, she is seeing God as foe not friend, she is honest with herself, with the people of God and most importantly with God. Because, as we see in verse 8, Naomi prays the prayer of Hassad upon her daughters in law. She knows deep down that her God is a god of Hassad, that He is indeed both sovereign and good. She believes that the ultimate outcome will be a Rom. 8:28 conclusion because it is all set to sanctify, to reunite and to restore.
I find myself taking the example of Naomi, desiring to be honest with myself, the people of God and, of course, God, Himself. I am in the process of seeing not only the over all, ultimate reign of the sovereign, but also that just as important, indeed, acting as the shadow of the sovereign is the goodness of a great and loving God. Because God is not just sovereign, He is good.
-BS
4.22.2009
Excerpt from my Book chapter 3
It disturbs me when I hear that by simply accepting mercy and grace with is most certainly un-merited, we are promised a life of prosperous means. While I believe that the Lord may indeed bless with talents to make riches,(3) it is a stretch to say that all followers are destined to be resolved of life's problems. I find it to be quiet the opposite. We are told in Scripture that we are not to expect any ease from this world in which we live(4).
We have been placed in front of the eternal justice, and through the words and actions of another, the very one we spurned, we are released, free to go. Not only are we free to go, we are still given the unbelievable opportunity to choose. Do we choose to respond to the incomprehensible act of love, or do we think that we can continue on in our affair with ourselves? It is with this audacity that we continue to act in opposition to the way we are meant to be. We were created to embrace with full humility the love, and forgiveness extended to within our grasp. Only when we decide to take hold of this forgiveness do we begin a process of relationship, not unlike any other, and yet utterly opposite of anything we have ever known before. This is exactly what we are invited into, every day. Not merely a relationship, but a sanctifying relationship. This relationship is as a marriage should be. It has been aptly stated that marriage is a gift resembling a full-length mirror with a tag upon it stating "here is to discovering what your really like!" Such is a relationship with our Redeemer.
It is in His light where we must daily make the decision. Ironically, not unlike a moth, we make a move towards the holy light of God. In this light is the beauty of the creator and the exposing radiation of Justice and Holiness. When we are first drawn in, we may get so close that we pass away, but are given the chance for a new life. To be "born again." Along with this paradox of destructive, life-breathing light do we realize that not only is our mortality exposed, but all the elements that consist of our make up is brought to light. Both the pure things and the self-destructive actions we have acquired. For the Believer we must embrace and progress into this sickeningly, bittersweet light. We must recognize that as painful as it may be, it is only with this light is our sin eradicated. Just as a cancerous cell is exposed and disintegrated by radiation, so is our cancerous nature of the flesh. It goes without saying that this process is painful, and very much a life-long event.
Yet, if we claim to accept His forgiveness, we must have no other choice but to proceed on this path. It is a path marked by a humble acceptance of the gift that is offered. When we progress on this path we must realize that there is nothing to be done that would warrant the placement of this forgiveness, gracious justification and life-long sanctification upon demanding. The mere thought of the above mentioned words must evoke but one action, a singular mindset; that of humility. Any other action practically negates the positive action of these terms. Without a humble spirit, one cannot reasonably expect to begin to comprehend the power of forgiveness, nor the ramifications of Justification. Just as those who have never fathered a child, therefore never able to fully understand the sense of unconditional love, which spurs on forgiveness, so is a proud person attempting to comprehend forgiveness moved by Agape. For this is exactly what precedes forgiveness of this magnitude. We have cheated, have made love to another, spitting in the face of our true love.
Yet, it is not the coldness in response, which we fully deserve, but loving arms, welcoming eyes, ready to bring us back.(5)
We have been placed in front of the eternal justice, and through the words and actions of another, the very one we spurned, we are released, free to go. Not only are we free to go, we are still given the unbelievable opportunity to choose. Do we choose to respond to the incomprehensible act of love, or do we think that we can continue on in our affair with ourselves? It is with this audacity that we continue to act in opposition to the way we are meant to be. We were created to embrace with full humility the love, and forgiveness extended to within our grasp. Only when we decide to take hold of this forgiveness do we begin a process of relationship, not unlike any other, and yet utterly opposite of anything we have ever known before. This is exactly what we are invited into, every day. Not merely a relationship, but a sanctifying relationship. This relationship is as a marriage should be. It has been aptly stated that marriage is a gift resembling a full-length mirror with a tag upon it stating "here is to discovering what your really like!" Such is a relationship with our Redeemer.
It is in His light where we must daily make the decision. Ironically, not unlike a moth, we make a move towards the holy light of God. In this light is the beauty of the creator and the exposing radiation of Justice and Holiness. When we are first drawn in, we may get so close that we pass away, but are given the chance for a new life. To be "born again." Along with this paradox of destructive, life-breathing light do we realize that not only is our mortality exposed, but all the elements that consist of our make up is brought to light. Both the pure things and the self-destructive actions we have acquired. For the Believer we must embrace and progress into this sickeningly, bittersweet light. We must recognize that as painful as it may be, it is only with this light is our sin eradicated. Just as a cancerous cell is exposed and disintegrated by radiation, so is our cancerous nature of the flesh. It goes without saying that this process is painful, and very much a life-long event.
Yet, if we claim to accept His forgiveness, we must have no other choice but to proceed on this path. It is a path marked by a humble acceptance of the gift that is offered. When we progress on this path we must realize that there is nothing to be done that would warrant the placement of this forgiveness, gracious justification and life-long sanctification upon demanding. The mere thought of the above mentioned words must evoke but one action, a singular mindset; that of humility. Any other action practically negates the positive action of these terms. Without a humble spirit, one cannot reasonably expect to begin to comprehend the power of forgiveness, nor the ramifications of Justification. Just as those who have never fathered a child, therefore never able to fully understand the sense of unconditional love, which spurs on forgiveness, so is a proud person attempting to comprehend forgiveness moved by Agape. For this is exactly what precedes forgiveness of this magnitude. We have cheated, have made love to another, spitting in the face of our true love.
Yet, it is not the coldness in response, which we fully deserve, but loving arms, welcoming eyes, ready to bring us back.(5)
4.14.2009
Cities and Discussions on sovereignty
I went down to the cities this past weekend to visit Cal and Christina. We had some good times, watched the Final Four at Joe's. Luke and I had a good conversation about God, rain, and Sovereignty.
It all made me think. God's sovereignty is one thing that I think ties in directly with my faith and trust, yet it wasn't until Luke brought it up that I really started thinking about it.God's sovereignty seems really about the recognition that God is in control, that His ways are higher than mine. This may seem elemental, let me expound.
Sovereignty has causes a lot of issues with many believers, the challenge of reconciling evil with a belief in an all-loving God. Issues dealing with such powerful questions as "why bad things happen to good people?"; "If God was really loving He would not allow that to happen."While I feel that an aspect regarding the question of God's sovereignty is related to free will, the ironic thing about believing that there is a higher being with an ability to do that which is above us, is that when we attempt to grasp this thing called sovereignty we realize we will never fully understand it. Which only makes sense. This is where faith comes in. Without a faith system it would be truly impossible to begin to attempt to understand much less accept the truth that there are events that occur beyond our human control, but not beyond the reach of God. These are the glasses we must don before we look back at an unsavory event, or even looking ahead at a potential issue in the future. We must either understand or accept the truth of a sovereign God, or we deny our faith all together. If we attempt to deny just the singular facet of faith that is God's sovereignty, we may then through in the towel. There is no reason to have a belief or place trust in a God who is not in control or is at our human level of understanding. A level that wrestles with the problem of pain, grasping at the straws of comprehension.
For a personal example, in my life right now, if I choose now to throw away my faith in a sovereign God, it does nothing for me, nothing to further my position in life. If, on the other hand, I decide to believe, seek to understand and accept with faith the work of a God who is above me, I find that I may be no further in my understanding but I am able to rest in a peace of knowing a loving being is over all. Many may read this declaring it an argument for a "crutch" use of faith. I would say that that is exactly what it is! Surprised? No one with a broken limb refuses help, a crutch to aid in their walking. A faith in a sovereign God in the midst of turmoil is an aid to the soul. I feel sorry for those whose hearts and souls are busted yet are too proud to embrace the healing help of faith. Some claim it is a weakness to use such a crutch, a lean-to of beliefs. I dare say it takes a bigger man to acknowledge his helplessness and need for assistance than it does to hobble along on one foot refusing service of any kind. If I were to place my bet on a foot race pitting the injured man with the use of a walking stick opposed to the injured man hopping on one foot, my money would return. For the man with the use of the crutch is sure to win.
-BS
It all made me think. God's sovereignty is one thing that I think ties in directly with my faith and trust, yet it wasn't until Luke brought it up that I really started thinking about it.God's sovereignty seems really about the recognition that God is in control, that His ways are higher than mine. This may seem elemental, let me expound.
Sovereignty has causes a lot of issues with many believers, the challenge of reconciling evil with a belief in an all-loving God. Issues dealing with such powerful questions as "why bad things happen to good people?"; "If God was really loving He would not allow that to happen."While I feel that an aspect regarding the question of God's sovereignty is related to free will, the ironic thing about believing that there is a higher being with an ability to do that which is above us, is that when we attempt to grasp this thing called sovereignty we realize we will never fully understand it. Which only makes sense. This is where faith comes in. Without a faith system it would be truly impossible to begin to attempt to understand much less accept the truth that there are events that occur beyond our human control, but not beyond the reach of God. These are the glasses we must don before we look back at an unsavory event, or even looking ahead at a potential issue in the future. We must either understand or accept the truth of a sovereign God, or we deny our faith all together. If we attempt to deny just the singular facet of faith that is God's sovereignty, we may then through in the towel. There is no reason to have a belief or place trust in a God who is not in control or is at our human level of understanding. A level that wrestles with the problem of pain, grasping at the straws of comprehension.
For a personal example, in my life right now, if I choose now to throw away my faith in a sovereign God, it does nothing for me, nothing to further my position in life. If, on the other hand, I decide to believe, seek to understand and accept with faith the work of a God who is above me, I find that I may be no further in my understanding but I am able to rest in a peace of knowing a loving being is over all. Many may read this declaring it an argument for a "crutch" use of faith. I would say that that is exactly what it is! Surprised? No one with a broken limb refuses help, a crutch to aid in their walking. A faith in a sovereign God in the midst of turmoil is an aid to the soul. I feel sorry for those whose hearts and souls are busted yet are too proud to embrace the healing help of faith. Some claim it is a weakness to use such a crutch, a lean-to of beliefs. I dare say it takes a bigger man to acknowledge his helplessness and need for assistance than it does to hobble along on one foot refusing service of any kind. If I were to place my bet on a foot race pitting the injured man with the use of a walking stick opposed to the injured man hopping on one foot, my money would return. For the man with the use of the crutch is sure to win.
-BS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
