10 Resolutions for Mental Health

John Piper has posted 10 resolutions for mental health from a message by Clyde Kilby. I'm not much for New Year's resolutions, but these look helpful to me. Maybe they will to you too.

1. At least once every day I shall look steadily up at the sky and remember that I, a consciousness with a conscience, am on a planet traveling in space with wonderfully mysterious things above and about me.

2. Instead of the accustomed idea of a mindless and endless evolutionary change to which we can neither add nor subtract, I shall suppose the universe guided by an Intelligence which, as Aristotle said of Greek drama, requires a beginning, a middle, and an end. I think this will save me from the cynicism expressed by Bertrand Russell before his death when he said: "There is darkness without, and when I die there will be darkness within. There is no splendor, no vastness anywhere, only triviality for a moment, and then nothing."

3. I shall not fall into the falsehood that this day, or any day, is merely another ambiguous and plodding twenty-four hours, but rather a unique event, filled, if I so wish, with worthy potentialities. I shall not be fool enough to suppose that trouble and pain are wholly evil parentheses in my existence, but just as likely ladders to be
climbed toward moral and spiritual manhood.

4. I shall not turn my life into a thin, straight line which prefers abstractions to reality. I shall know what I am doing when I abstract, which of course I shall often have to do.

5. I shall not demean my own uniqueness by envy of others. I shall stop boring into
myself to discover what psychological or social categories I might belong to. Mostly I shall simply forget about myself and do my work.

6. I shall open my eyes and ears. Once every day I shall simply stare at a tree, a flower, a cloud, or a person. I shall not then be concerned at all to ask what they are but simply be glad that they are. I shall joyfully allow them the mystery of what
Lewis calls their "divine, magical, terrifying and ecstatic" existence.

7. I shall sometimes look back at the freshness of vision I had in childhood and try,
at least for a little while, to be, in the words of Lewis Carroll, the "child of the pure unclouded brow, and dreaming eyes of wonder."

8. I shall follow Darwin's advice and turn frequently to imaginative things such as good literature and good music, preferably, as Lewis suggests, an old book and
timeless music.

9. I shall not allow the devilish onrush of this century to usurp all my energies but will instead, as Charles Williams suggested, "fulfill the moment as the moment." I shall try to live well just now because the only time that exists is now.

10. Even if I turn out to be wrong, I shall bet my life on the assumption that this world is not idiotic, neither run by an absentee landlord, but that today, this very day, some stroke is being added to the cosmic canvas that in due course I shall understand with joy as a stroke made by the architect who calls himself Alpha and Omega.

Living Out Our Doctrine

On Scot McKnight's Jesus Creed blog he has a post about a letter he received from a church planter. The planter is apparently dealing with some vocal Calvinists. There's a lot that might be said about the post and letter, the Calvinists, and those who have commented on the blog. For those of us who adhere to a Calvinistic/Reformed/Sovereign Grace theology, perhaps the best response has already been made by Abraham Piper.

In regard to the post and many of the responses, it is interesting to note that for all the talk about how divisive Calvinists are, no one noted that Dr. McKnight chose to title his post "Letter about Those Pesky Calvinists" [emphasis mine]. To put this in perspective, how would many of the commentors to this post react to a post titled "Those Pesky Arminians" or "Those Pesky Emergents?" I may deal with this tangentially in a later post, but I'll leave it for now.

For the moment I want to focus on one point made in one comment,

"There are obnoxious Christians of every variety. But there is something inherent in Calvinism that causes people always to be drawing lines. I know some gracious Calvinists. But, honestly, they live above their theology."

No. Of all Christians, Calvinists who understand the implications of their theology will be the most gracious of people. I know this may seem contradictory to some who have only interacted with TR's (the truly reformed), but Calvinism should make us humble and gracious. One problem is that no one ever fully understands the implications of their theology.

For the Calvinist, we sometimes understand less because we tend to focus on a few select implications of our theology. In an attempt to be God-centered, sometimes we don't think about the human implications of holding to Reformed doctrine. So let me illustrate with a few brief points.

The Calvinist is first and foremost a Christian. As such we are called to live as Jesus lived, which means that like Him it should be said of each of us that "a bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not quench" (Matthew 12:20).

Our theology says that all men are totally depraved. This means that every aspect of our being, including our reason, has been affected by the fall. What we know we know because the Holy Spirit has been our teacher. If He has chosen to teach us some things, and others different things, we have no reason to boast. Once I was an Arminian. My theology does not allow me to take credit for becoming a Calvinist. I'm not a Calvinist because I'm better or smarter than my friends who remain Arminians.

As an aside, this is not to say that reason and civil discourse have no place in the Christian life. God uses means to accomplish his ends. But if in a discussion I plant the seed that the Spirit brings to life, the seed was given to me by the Spirit and brought to life by the Spirit. Likewise, if in a discussion with a fellow believer I say something that leads them to a reformed theology, neither I nor that person can take credit for it occurring.

Third, the Calvinist should understand that all that he has is because of grace. There is nothing that makes me superior to my brother. As John Newton wrote grace is amazing because it saves a "wretch like me." God loves me not because of anything in me. I have not earned nor do I deserve His love.

Calvinism rightly understood puts an axe to the tree of pride. The problem exists that pride is a stubborn tree, and we turn from understanding all that our reformed doctrine would teach us. May we (I as much as anyone) repent of this error and labor with the axe to put an end my pride.

It Is Worth It

I've started re-reading Bob Benson's See You at the House. Then tonight Pastor Williams started a series on Abraham beginning with God calling him to leave everything he knew to go somewhere. God didn't say where, or how long it would take, just that Abraham would be blessed and be a blessing.

That reminded me of how the first section of See You at the House - "Looking for the Threads" - starts:

The quest -

Wherever it takes you - go;

Whichever the task - do it;

Whatever the burden - accept it;

Whenever it calls - answer it;

Whichever the lesson - learn it;

However dark the path - follow him;

Because wherever he takes you,

It is worth it.

--Bob Benson--

Let's Race

A race is one of the metaphors the Apostle Paul uses to describe the Christian life. This metaphor is picked up by Steve Taylor in his song "The Finish Line" from Squint. If you have never heard of Steve Taylor, it probably means you were not listening to Christian music in the late 1980's. Steve is probably best known for "I Want to Be a Clone" (though my personal favorites are "Drive, He Said" and "Cash Cow") and having a sarcastic sense of humor that did not always endear him with more fundementalist Christians. I, however, have a great affection for his music.

"The Finish Line" is something of a modern day Pilgrim's Progress, admittedly in much shortened form. It follows a prototypical Christian from conversion to death. If you listen closely, you may find something of your own journey in the song. The confident to arrogant beginning. The stumbling that causes you to eventually buy "the party line." The questions as to how so many good things become idols. Then, hopefully, that return to relying on Jesus, as we emerge "bloody but wise." The title of the album is taken from this song, "You squint with the light of the truth in your eyes."

Enjoy.

Prophetic from the Center

Some time back I wrote a post about a message given by Dr. D. A. Carson at the 2007 Gospel Coalition conference. In that post was a lengthy quote from Dr. Carson, including the following statement: "It is easy to sound prophetic from the margins. What is urgently needed is to be prophetic from the center." I have been thinking about this statement and what it means to be "prophetic from the center."

If you read the entire quote, I think it is obvious what is meant by "from the center" versus "from the margins." The margins are those peripheral issues, on both the left and the right, that engross so many people. These are issues like environmentalism, social justice, gay marriage, prayer in schools, music styles in worship, etc. The center are those issues that are essential to Christian faith, including the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the atonement, the resurrection, i.e. what "takes Christians from lostness, condemnation, alienation from God all the way through conversion, and discipleship, to the consummation, to resurrection bodies and the new heaven and the new earth."

The question, I think, is what does it mean to be "prophetic?" What it does not mean is that Christians should join the Jeane Dixon fan club. Biblical prophets sometimes made predictions about the future, like:

Micah 5:2
But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah,
who are too little to be among the clans of Judah,
from you shall come forth for me
one who is to be ruler in Israel,
whose origin is from of old,
from ancient days.
ESV

Micah here prophesies that the Messiah will come from Bethlehem. Clearly this is "predictive" and is one of the things prophets did in the Bible. But prophets did at least two other things in the Bible, both of which were more common than prediction.

One was that the prophets pointed out the sinful condition of the people. For example:

Micah 7:2-3
The godly has perished from the earth,
and there is no one upright among mankind;
they all lie in wait for blood,
and each hunts the other with a net.
Their hands are on what is evil, to do it well;
the prince and the judge ask for a bribe,
and the great man utters the evil desire of his soul;
thus they weave it together.
ESV

When we are prophetic in this sense from the margins, it is easy because it most often takes the form of condemnation. It is a means to lift ourselves above those on whom we pronounce judgment. This is the Pharisees - clean on the outside but full of death on the inside. Our condemnation falls on any who have not cleaned the outside, regardless of the state of their heart.

We carry picket signs that say, "God hates fags" without acknowledging that God also hates the self-righteous. We maintain our ritual, but have forgotten love, forgiveness, and mercy. Jesus in contrast does not put out the smoking flax or break the bruised reed. How do we behave around those of weak faith who are struggling? If we are prophetic from the margins, most often we will shun them.

To be prophetic from the center is much harder in no small part because it requires humility. John the Baptist called the Pharisess a brood of vipers, but also said he was not fit to tie the sandal of the Messiah. He proclaimed that Jesus must increase while he (John) decreased.

To be prophetic from the center means we have to first acknowledge that we need the gospel as much as anyone else even now. It means that we have to acknowledge that we do not live up to God's standard even now. Like Paul we need to be truthful that we have not attained, but that we are pressing on. To be prophetic from the center requires a balance of boldness and humility.
But prophets in the Bible also proclaimed God's mercy and lovingkindness, like:

Micah 7:18-19
Who is a God like you, pardoning iniquity
and passing over transgression
for the remnant of his inheritance?
He does not retain his anger forever,
because he delights in steadfast love.
He will again have compassion on us;
he will tread our iniquities under foot.
You will cast all our sins
into the depths of the sea.
ESV

To be prophetic in this sense from the margins is the prosperity gospel. God wants you to have your best life now. God wants you to be healthy and have a two car garage. God does not want you to suffer, for you are more than conquerors in Christ. You need to claim your healing, money, possessions and have faith that God will deliver.

Less extreme is to say that while things may not always go your way, you will always sense the presence of God. If you are faithful to follow God's plan for your life, you will always have a smile on your face. Both of these are easy because people will respond.

But being prophetic from the center is to say your best life is not yet here. The kingdom breaks into this age, but is not fully realized yet. We still have struggles and difficulties. Like Jesus we continue on for the joy set before us. Per Paul we recognize that death as the last enemy has not yet been destroyed, but will be. Love we are told bears, believes, hopes and endures. All of these indicate an element of tension, struggle, and difficulty.

This message is not as immediately attractive. Telling people to hold onto a Savior who will deliver some day is not as appealling as telling them God is like Santa Claus bestowing gifts on those who are nice. But it is real and many people who have been through difficulty will find in the gospel the truth. Yes, this life is hard, but even so God is good.

This is why Paul says we are to be pitied if the resurrection is not true, because our hope, our joy, our anchor is on what is to come, not on the now. We live now and we show the kingdom now and we try to make things better now. Believers before Jesus stood with their arm stretched out pointing to the future.

We now stand with both arms outstretched pointed to the past (the cross) and the future (the resurrection). We do so also to die figuratively and literally for the cause of Christ. Some being prophetic from the margins will condemn us as compromising with the world, calling us gluttons and winos. Some being prophetic from the margins will say we are from some hick town and not sophisticated or educated. Some being prophetic from the margins will say that we could deliver ourselves from suffering if we had more faith.

We are to love them all, and pray for them to be forgiven even as they stone us. Who knows who will be holding their coats as we die.

Fundementalists, Antithesis and Common Grace

Updated Below

While I have been blogging on Harry Potter, there has been a rather interesting discussion going on over at Reformation 21. This has been between Rick Phillips and Carl Trueman on fundementalism and it's merits and dangers. I'm not planning on commenting a lot, I just want to provide some quotes that maybe will encourage you to read the entire discussion. As I think about it I may have more to say later.

It starts with Rev. Phillips' move to Greenville and his decision of which school to enroll his children. The final decision was Bob Jones elementary, an arm of Bob Jones university. Rev. Phillips writes:

But the fourth reason is the one I really want to talk about. The fundamentalists get the idea of antithesis. . . . I find in general that the fundamentalists get the idea that the Bible really is the Word of God and that our only salvation is in the blood of Christ. There is no talk about postmodern hermeneutics among the fundamentalists. They believe the Bible is the Word of God because it says so, and so do I. They believe that men, women, and children are sinners who must believe in the cross in order to be saved. There is no talk of alternative theories of the atonement with them. They understand that the church must stand out against the world, that holiness is our calling, and that Christians are to witness to the lost. Amen, amen, and amen. They get the Christian antithesis, that light has shined in the darkness and that we are to walk in the light and shine the light into the darkness.

Frankly, because of the big idea of antithesis, I am more comfortable with the fundamentalists than I am with the broad evangelicals. More and more, broad evangelicals do not get the idea of antithesis, and for this reason even when they have a pretty good formal doctrinal statement, they seldom really stand up for it.

Rev. Phillips goes on in other posts to discuss price as a factor in the decision and the reformed leanings of Bob Jones. But the discussion is taken up in earnest by Dr. Trueman. Dr. Trueman makes four points about antithesis, all of which are interesting, but the last two are the most significant. From the third:

3. An overwhelming emphasis on antithesis creates a situation where others are only ever critiqued, not learned from, while we remain blissfully above correction. That's cultic and it's Gnosticism, and the Reformed world currently contains a couple of scary examples of exactly this kind of thinking and church life. . . . It can in fact be used in such a way as to justify a form of Gnostic empiricism and in effect to say 'everyone else has tradition, we just have the truth' is a problem. It could be better translated as `We have a tradition like everyone else, but we're not going to write it down so that it cannot be critiqued by you or anybody else.'

And from the fourth:

4. Charity of spirit (not compromise of doctrine) is a Christian virtue. This involves the ability to relate to those who are different, to treat with respect as made in the image of God those from whom we differ. An overwhelming emphasis on the intellectual/cultural antithesis does not, in my experience, foster the kind of appreciation for others, the self-deprecating humour, and the ability to see the absurdities of one's own positions, which enable this. . . . My point is simply that the antithesis can be abused in the name of Christ to subvert these very Christian imperatives, not that it always does so.

Rev. Phillips responded to Dr. Trueman and makes points worth considering. I want to move on though to comments from Sean Michael Lucas who joined in with two posts (part 1 and part 2) on his blog. In part 1, Dr. Lucas notes:

[M]y primary identity is a believer of Jesus and I'm called to love other believers in Jesus regardless of their spiritual maturity or theological perspective (even, shudder, Arminians). I live out this identity as a Presbyterian, committed to the wholeness of the Reformed faith as the best explanation of the Bible and eager for others to embrace the same perspective that I hold. I affirm catholicity while holding personally to the Reformed faith.

In part 2 Dr. Lucas discusses the concepts of antithesis and common grace and how these have created two streams in the reformed tradition. He refers to this split as the "Kuyperian legacy" in honor of Dutch theologian Abraham Kuyper. He discusses both the positive and negative tendencies of both. Dr. Lucas says there is no way to meld the two together and admits to having fundementalist/antithesis leanings. I think there is a lot of value in reading and thinking about this. Regardless of where you stand, I think we should all heed Dr. Lucas' conclusion:

Finally, above all, we need to exercise the judgment of charity toward each other. By recognizing the dangers in our position, we are freed to recognize the value of the other--I can affirm my brothers and sisters who in common grace run coffee houses and line their churches with their art in order to engage in conversations with others. They bring something to the body of Christ that I don't bring; they are "jazz" to my "three-chords and a chorus" (1 Cor 12:12-27). I need those who emphasis common grace; and they, frankly, need me.

Update: Rev. Phillips has posted some additional thoughts based on Dr. Lucas' thoughts

Power in Harry Potter

By now you know: WARNING: There be spoilers ahead!

Horcruxes or the Deathly Hallows? The choice was anything but simple for Harry. It was a choice analogous to the choice to use or to destroy the ring of power. What Dumbledore had wanted was more or less clear, so trusting him would send Harry after horcruxes. But Harry knew now that Dumbledore had a past which he had been unwilling to share (trust to) Harry.

How do you handle power? Is it to be sought and used for your own benefit, or is it to be taken only with the outmost care and diligence?

For Voldemort and the Death Eaters that is a silly question. Power is meant to be wielded, otherwise it is wasted. Power means having the ability to get what you want when you want it. For Voldemort, it was a way to overcome death and to get "respect" that he had not gotten any other way. This is community committed to the principle of survival of the fittest. You either rule the pack by force, or you walk around with your tail between your legs.

One of the big surprises in book seven is the past of Albus Dumbledore. We learn in the book that his history included a desire for power and a scheming about how this might be done. While this might have been "for the greater good," it was a vain (both in the sense of proud and in the sense of worthless) pursuit. His scheming led, however indirectly, to the death of his sister and marked him for life.

Dumbledore becomes one then who shuns power. Many wondered why he never tried to become the Minister of Magic. Some, like Dolores Umbridge, assumed he was trying to take the position. But the reality was that Dumbledore feared what he might do in that position of power. When Harry tells Dumbledore in King's Cross that he would have been a great minister, Dumbledore responds (DH p. 718):

Would I? . . . I am not so sure. I had proven, as a very young man, that power was my weakness and my temptation. It is a curious thing, Harry, but perhaps those who are best suited to power are those who have never sought it.

Dumbledore's wisdom in this matter is evident by two incidents signficant to Harry. The first was when Dumbledore realized that James Potter, Harry's father, had not just any invisibility cloak, but THE invisibility cloak. One third of the Deathly Hallows. Dumbledore had to examine it, and it was in his possession on the night Voldemort killed Harry's parents. Likely having the cloak would have made no difference, but the question remains, particularly for Dumbledore knowing his own motives for wanting the cloak.

Second, Dumbledore kills himself, effectively, by putting on the ring that contained the resurrection stone. Voldemort had cursed the ring (similar to the poison protecting the locket) and while he continued to live with Snape's aid, Dumbledore's days were numbered. The black hand was a reminder that death was upon him and that soon he would die. This is the reason drinking the poison was an easy choice for Dumbledore. He was dying already. Power is frequently the weakness of the great. (I'm tempted to get on a soapbox about term limits for elected officials, but I'll let you work it out.)

So, Harry's choice in book seven (and at other times as well) is the choice to pursue power, or trust his friends. When Dobby dies while saving Harry, Ron, Hermione, Luna, and others, Harry realizes what he has to do. Even though he knows Voldemort has discovered the location of the elder wand. Even though Voldemort will get that wand which could make him nearly invincible, Harry chooses to pursue the horcruxes and not the Deathly Hallows. To take the path that Frodo takes, not the path to power but the path of sacrifice. The path that will require him to depend on Ron, Hermione, and, eventually, Neville instead of the path where he could be the next great wizard.

As believers, we are called to humility. Jesus is much more than an example and much more than a teacher, but He is both. His example is that we do not grasp for power and authority in this life. The least shall be greatest. The meek will inherit. We are sheep in the midst of wolves. And as Harry finally trusts Dumbledore, we must trust our great Teacher who calls us to die.

On Harry Potter (and Choices) - I

Not quite a week after getting "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" I have finished the book. While I will avoid any major spoilers for those who are or plan on reading the book, there will be discussion of themes and ideas in what follows that may reveal plot elements. You have been warned.

I am not about to argue that the series in general or any book in the series in particular presents the gospel. From that sense, if we are gospel focused, one might argue that investing time in reading the series is not profitable. While I think that is an extreme position (I heartily recommend the answer from D. A. Carson and Tim Keller on what causes fragmentation in the church today - bottom of the list as of this writing) that would lead one to nearly all fiction, whether written or otherwise, I see it as a defensible, though not correct, position.

Others would argue that it is not that the books are fiction, but that they deal with magic in a positive light. In the series, there is normal magic that is acceptable and then there are the dark arts. Many Christians would argue that the Bible knows nothing of "white magic" and that all magic is "dark" magic. In his book A Visit to Vanity Fair Alan Jacobs includes an essay titled "Harry Potter's Magic" in which he lays out a case for why the series is acceptable reading for Christians even though witches and wizards are the focus of the series. The normal magic in the Harry Potter books is not typically divination, but is a cousin to technology. Instead of a dishwasher, one uses a wand to clean dishes. But there is also a recognition (one significant scene in the last book stands out in this regard) that some tasks call for doing the hard work instead of taking the easy (magical) alternative.

To consistently reject the Harry Potter series because of magic requires that one also reject Tolkein's Lord of the Rings. There is no legitimate argument that there is a substantial difference between the magic in The Lord of the Rings and the magic in Harry Potter, between, say Gandalf and Dumbledore. Lest we forget, in Tolkein's work Aragorn brings an army of the dead to fight against Sauron's forces.

So one could reject Harry Potter due to series focus on magic. One might be concerned that the series would make readers want to investigate wicca or other occult practices. However, doing so would also require that all books containing a positive view of witches, wizards and magic likewise be rejected.

I understand the basis of the argument, but do not agree. These novels (both Rowling's and Tolkein's) are clearly fictional works, as evidenced by the names of most of the characters in the Harry Potter series. Also, as Jacob's noted in his essay, in Harry Potter's world you either are born with the ability to do magic or you are not. One does not acquire the talent to do magic through investigation or practice. The seeming majority of the world simply cannot do magic.

I have dealt here with some objections as to why Christians should not read the Harry Potter series. I will continue with a discussion of why I think there is benefit in reading the series. But one final word: if your conscience tells you not to read the books, do not read them. Any benefit is not worth an offense to your conscience. If you have a friend who does not think they should read them, do not push them on your friend and thus become a participant in offending your friend's conscience. Finally, I encourage those who do not think Christians should read the books, do not look down on those that do read. You may, gently and in love, present why you think we should not, but do not let it become a wedge.

Gospel Passion

Recently a group of pastors and theologians met as part of The Gospel Coalition. From my vantage point (not being at the conference) it appears that the driving person behind this group is Dr. Donald (D. A.) Carson. Dr. Carson opened the conference with the message "What Is the Gospel?" from 1 Corinthians 15 (audio or video is available at the website). Dr. Carson states at the start of his message that the Bible

understands the gospel to be the embracing category that holds much of the whole Bible together and takes Christians from lostness, condemnation, alienation from God all the way through conversion, and discipleship, to the consummation, to resurrection bodies and the new heaven and the new earth."

Shortly after that Dr. Carson says:

Perhaps more common yet today is the tendency to assume the gospel, whatever that is, while devoting creative energy and passion to other issues - marriage, happiness, prosperity, evangelism, the poor, wrestling with Islam, bioethics, pressures of secularization, dangers on the left, dangers on the right - the list is endless. But this overlooks the fact that our hearers inevitably are drawn toward that about which we are most passionate. Every teacher knows that. My students are unlikely to learn all that I teach them. I've resigned myself to that for a long time. They are most likely to learn what I am excited about. If the gospel is merely assumed, while relatively peripherial issues ignite our passion, we will train a new generation to downplay the gospel and focus on the periphery. It is easy to sound prophetic from the margins. What is urgently needed is to be prophetic from the center. What is to be feared, in the famous words of T.S. Eliot, is that the center does not hold. Moreover if in fact we do focus on the gospel and understand it aright we shall soon see how this gospel, rightly understood, directs us how to think about and what to do about a vast array of other kinds of issues.

What then, about this blog? What do I focus on and what am I passionate about? I struggle at times to be passionate about the gospel (per Dr. Carson's definition above) and not just jumping into the latest intramural battles that seem so popular in the conservative church today.

What I want, using Dr. Carson's words, is to not get caught up in the periphery, but to speak from the center of our faith. If successful, then there will be nothing new here on this blog. This will be a relay station for a message that has been transmitted for millennia. I'm not the best relay station and I may not have the best range, but I want the signal to be clear. I want to encourage believers, bear witness to the lost, and defend the gospel when necessary.

I acknowledge that I have not always done so in the past, getting caught up in debates over matters about which we should not be expending much effort (matters of conscience). That is to say that I have been passionate about the periphery.

If your faith like my faith is in Jesus who died, was buried, and was raised on the third day, in Jesus who told His disciples that Scriptures speak of Him, then I encourage you by God's grace to reflect on those Scriptures and in doing so to make as much of Jesus as can. Then let us bear witness to Him with as an irenic spirit as possible in a ministry of reconciliaton.

Plague Flight

(HT: Baptist Blogger)

The following is a short excerpt from Martin Luther's "Whether One May Flee from a Deadly Plague." Think of this in terms of the AIDS epidemic, which is less contagious than the plague in Luther's day.

This I know, that if it were Christ or his mother who were laid low by illness, everybody would be so solicitous and would gladly become a servant or helper. Everyone would want to be bold and fearless; nobody would flee but everyone would come running. And yet they don’t hear what Christ himself says, ‘As you did to one of the least, you did it to me….’ If you wish to serve Christ and to wait on him, very well, you have your sick neighbor close at hand. Go to him and serve him, and you will surely find Christ in him, not outwardly but in his word. If you do not wish or care to serve your neighbor you can be sure that if Christ lay there instead you would not do so either and would let him lie there. Those are nothing but illusions on your part which puff you up with vain pride, namely, that you would really serve Christ if he were there in person. Those are nothing but lies; whoever wants to serve Christ in person would surely serve his neighbor as well.

Cyberspace and Blogs

(HT: Vitamin Z)

Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" is one of the better (the best?) cultural critiques I've read (don't take my word for it - check out the review on Discerning Reader). This video is worth listening to the whole thing (it's an interview, the video portion isn't really needed), even if you don't agree with everything he says. I like the concluding question he says we need to ask, "Am I using this technology or is it using me?"

If 10 minutes is longer than you want to spend, then let the video load and watch from about 6:00 minutes remaining to 3:40 minutes remaining (however, by doing this you'll miss some thought provoking ideas).



I also like a related comment made by Os Guinness in a recent interview conducted on the White Horse Inn.

But it comes down in the rain or it comes from your mother's milk in this country. . . You take something as irrational currently as the blogs. Now the blogs are partly a useful counter check on the public media. But if you ever want an explosion, an orgy of irrationality and emotionality, look at the blogs. This is our world. A world of television, image, makeovers, blogs, impression management, and so on. We are living in a world that undermines truth at almost - every time you turn around.

If you do not know who Os Guinness is, or have never read any of his books, I highly recommend The Call. Others are equally good, like Prophetic Untimeliness or A Time for Truth.

Both of these come back to my love/hate relationship with technology. It provided the opportunity to hear the interviews with these two men, but it also demands so much time and attention. In Neil Postman's words, it is a Faustian bargain.

Paradoxical Teachers

Why, if as I proposed in the last post, if all real spiritual knowledge only comes from being taught by God, did I even bother posting the last post? In fact, doesn't the Bible tell us that there are those gifted by the Holy Spirit to be teachers, which would mean my previous post falls flat on its face?

I don't think so. I have to acknowledge that if pushed to an extreme, my last post would essentially lead one into a hyper-Calvinistic stance. Contrary to some popular opinion, a hyper-Calvinist is not simply someone who believes in predestination (that's ordinary Calvinism, and does not require that one deny the necessity of evangelism). A hyper-Calvinist believes so strongly that only God can "teach" us in a way that brings us to salvation, that man should not preach the gospel in a manner that calls the lost to be saved.

I want to affirm here the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), which states (3.1):

God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: (Eph. 1:11, Rom. 11:33, Heb. 6:17, Rom. 9:15,18) yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, (James 1:13,17, 1 John 1:5) nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established. (Acts 2:23, Matt. 17:12, Acts 4:27–28, John 19:11, Prov. 16:33)

God's sovereignty over all things is exercised in such a way that the necessity of the actions of others is required. [Let me restate that with connections to the WCF: God's sovereignty over all things (whatsoever comes to pass) is exercised in such a way that the necessity (contingency) of the actions of others (second causes) is required (established).]

In relationship to the topic at hand of teachers, they are frequently the agents of God's act of revealing Himself to us. The primary tool that God uses to reveal Himself is the Scriptures, and we can learn from God by studying the Scriptures on our own. But God has gifted some to be teachers of the Scriptures so that through them we might learn more about Him.

Another Verse

I've been talking about Romans 12:18, which I noted as a long-time significant verse for me. So I pop onto the blog tonight (I use the links I have to visit blogs I frequent) and read the daily verse (in this case, verses) from the ESV site; Hebrews 12:1-2 which are also long-time friends:

Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.

Just More Randomness

Tomorrow (okay, today now, if you want to be technical) I'm off to Grand Rapids. The long winter is (seems to be) over. I'm not sure if people who have always lived south of Tennessee can really understand cabin fever, but it will be nice to travel a bit and hear the Word proclaimed.

While reading this, one of the early lines:

I sometimes - not often enough - grieve at how little the Scriptures actually touch my heart.

reminded me of a song (most things do, I just don't usually talk about it, because, well, many of the songs from my youth might be better if I forgot them). It was off topic there, so I didn't post it as a comment, but thought I would bring it up here.

There was (still is, I think) a CCM group called Glad that was most popular in the '80s. One of their songs was "Most of the Time" which had lines like:

"And sometimes I hear You with Your gentle soothing voice;
Your words are always truthful, and they cause me to rejoice.

But most of the time I'm still not understanding,
the smallest part of what Your trying to say.
And most of the time I find that I'm pretending,
And the things that You desire get in my way."

The song struck me when compared to most Christian music of the time because it was not about how great everything was if you were a Christian. The song found hope and joy not in blessings in this life, but in total dependence on Jesus and the trustworthiness of the Scriptures:

"All of the time You say that You're perfecting me;
And everything You've said I know it's true.
And some of the time I'm close to understanding,
That it isn't up to me it's up to You."

That is the hope, that my sanctification, like my salvation, is in His hands, not mine. Not that I don't "press on" but that I know that "He who began a good work in me will be faithful to complete it." It is the message of Colossians 3:1-4 - focus on Jesus, on the Kingdom that is not fully here yet, not on this world which is passing away.

Which reminds me of a Bob Benson story . . .

Have a blessed weekend!