With several papers looming from a summer class, with a new class finally crested onto the calendar (started a new on last week), I have no business picking up an unrelated book. But, alas, my amazon.com trigger finger did again get heavy this week and a little (well, maybe I should say large at 600 pages) showed up on my stoop. After having enjoyed George Marsden's book The Soul of the American University over Christmas break, I was even more excited to get to his new biography Jonathan Edwards - A Life (Yale Univesity Press). The new printing of the 2003 book in paperback sealed the deal and Amazon was up to the task. I probably won't finish this book for quite some time (hopefull I will, finish it) but finding an hour in it today was no disappointment. With Edwards studies growing and the influence of his thought surging through many in the current scene, reading about this life is of interest to me. A quick outline of this man's life is available here - http://www.yale.edu/wje/html/life_of__edwards.html.
Out...
--------
POC Blog
The random technotheolosophical blogging of Reid S. Monaghan
WEEK 1 – CHAPTER 2 – THE PEOPLE WHO KNOW THEIR GOD
I have known God and that is all that matters. Not known about God, not facts concerning God nor right theology, but I have known God and nothing else matters. Such is the subject of Chapter 2 of Knowing God. In all of our talk about salvation, truth, God, Christ, heaven, hell, redemption, and the life to come do we really know God in such a way that nothing else matters. This is Packer’s challenge to us.
Certainly a challenging question to me. In my life I have seen days of arid spiritual dryness that I have seen in my life when I have doubted and questioned my knowledge of God. Yet there have been days soaked with the rains of a vision of God so powerful that I had no choice but weep in thanksgiving that such a presence was so close to my soul.
The essence of this chapter – the reality of our personal, intimate knowledge of God cannot be dodged, nor should it. In the mundane of life, the everyday normalcy of existence, how we need to know the heart, the character, and the voice of the one who breaks into our world and overwhelms us with his grace. I have wrestled with this in my reading (particularly in Jonathan Edwards Religious Affections and a contemporary work by Donald Whitney, Ten Questions to Diagnose Your Spiritual Health), I have wrestled with it in watching those I love in anguish of soul and heart ache, I have wrestled with it in the midst of agonizing intellectual questions that seemed to have no end, but in the end my soul has been comforted by God in the midst of the journey. One thing is certain, I desire to know God in the way Packer describes (great energy for God, great thoughts about God, great boldness for God in spite of harsh consequences, and great contentment in God alone) but feel so far from obtaining such a loft height.
A quote from Edwards came to mind – in the state of my weak affections and desire to know God. Humbled to dust…
So has God disposed things, in the affair of our redemption, and in his glorious dispensations, revealed to us in the gospel, as though everything were purposely contrived in such a manner, as to have the greatest possible tendency to reach our hearts in the most tender part, and move our affections most sensibly and strongly. How great cause have we therefore to be humbled to the dust, that we are no more affected! Jonathan Edwards, The Religious Affections, Banner of Truth Edition (Carlisle:PA, Banner of Truth Trust, 2001) 53.--------
Knowing God - Week 1 – Chapter 1
The book begins with a rather lengthy quote from Charles Hadden Spurgeon. A wonderful quote which I will not reproduce here for the sake of time exhorted and encouraged me about the nature of Theology, the study of the divine. First, it humbles the mind. Spurgeon writes:
But when we come to this master science, finding that our plumbline cannot sound its depth, and that our eagle eye cannot see its height, we turn away with the thought that vain main would be wise, but he is like a wild ass’s colt; and with solemn exclamation, “I am but yesterday, and know nothing.” No subject of contemplation will tend more to humble the mind, than thoughts of God…Second, theology enlarges the mind. Again Spurgeon helps us:Quoted in JI Packer, Knowing God, Americanized Edition (Downers Grove: IL, Intervarsity Press, 1993) 18.
Nothing will so enlarge the intellect, nothing so magnify the whole soul of man, as a devout, earnest, continued investigation of the great subject of the Deity.Finally, not only does theology both humble the mind and set the mind ablaze, the contemplation of Christ is also a balm for every wound and speaks peace to the winds of trial. The study of God, who He is, who I am in light of Him, the purpose and nature of my life in reference to the will of God for the Universe – such is the content of Theology, such is central to human existence. Packer writes that one disregards God and Theology at our own peril. The neglecting thereof, results in what he calls the wasting of life and the loss of one’s soul:Ibid. 18.
Disregard the study of God and you sentence yourself to stumble and blunder through life blindfolded, as it were, with no sense of direction and no understanding of what surrounds you. This way you can waste your life and loose your soul.After laying out five foundational areas of study for theology ( God speaking in his word, God as Lord and King over all, God as Savior in Jesus Christ, God as triune, Godliness as response in obedience and faith to God’s revelation), speaking of basic themes in the study of God (his noncommunicable attributes, his powers, perfections) he moves on to close the chapter by warning those who will study such lofty and glorious things not to allow such knowledge to puff us up with arrogance. The chapter closes with a great explanation of what it means for one to meditate on the truth about God in relationship with and in humble submission before God Himself. Christian Meditation, lost in today’s busy and buzzing world of church programs and bottom shelf faith, is described with great clarity in the finals words of this chapter:Packer, 19.
Meditation is the activity of calling to mind, and thinking over, and dwelling on, and applying to oneself, the various things that one knows about the works and ways and purposes and promises of God. It is an activity of holy thought, consciously performed in the presence of God, under the eye of God, by the help of God, as a means to communion with God. Its purpose is to clear one’s mental and spiritual vision of God, and to let his truth make its full and proper impact on one’s mind and heart. It is a matter of talking to oneself about God and oneself; it is, indeed, often a matter of arguing with oneself, reasoning oneself out of moods of doubt and unbelief into a clear apprehension of God’s power and grace.And with that – I just say Amen! Oh, if more of our counselors and psychologists would prescribe more of the like. --------Packer, 23.
Thoughts on Knowing God - Week 1
Over the next couple of months I will be in a class studying systematic theology (Prolegomena, The doctrine of revelation and the Bible, and Theology Proper) - in plain language the class is about a systematic study of the major doctrines of the Christian faith. Part of the class will be working through the book Knowing God by JI Packer professor emeritus at Regent College, and thinking out loud about the content of its pages. I figured I would use POC Blog as the vehicle. Hopefully you won't be bored to death by the thoughts and perhaps encouraged to pick up the book. Packer's book is one which is becoming a classic in a short amount of time.
--------
Postmodern Christian...how hard it is to be...
For anyone out there who has heard the ever increasing choir of those "who are emerging" "who are reimaging - church, evangelism, spirituality" "Who are in the next wave" "Who see all things as dance" proclaiming judgment upon everthing "of modernity" let’s do this as an exercise in “PoMo/Emerging Christian” understanding – This is a good one to use as an exercise - http://www.theooze.com/articles/article.cfm?id=825 Read it first at the link above, then go below - I’ll comment on this as we go in bold, to show how much of this is just language games and silliness and we really need to get on with something much more productive for the Kingdom of God. Your modern, no your modern, no I'm postmodern...yada, yada - is getting waaaaay old. The "Rule of Pinky" by John O'Keefe Saturday July 24, 2004 PAGE: 1 While I would never say there should be a “litmus test” (such tests are wrong for the “postmodern”– because they imply certainty – in other words – they don’t like things so tightened down)for being a postmodern/emerging community of faith, I will say just claiming to be one does not make you one. I am Irish. I could claim to be German, learn the language, learn the culture, and learn to like the food (I all ready like the beer), but I would not be German (he is stating a combination of two principles known as the law of identity – something IS what it IS and the law of non-Contradiction – Something cannot be what it is and NOT what it is at the same time and in the same sense – these are logical maxims that PoMos usually deny, but then use in their arguments – as he will do – ie I’m not going to give you a test – I don’t believe it that – but here is a test). At best, I would be an Irishman who appreciates German culture. And at worst, I would be a person seeking to be what he is not for some alternative gain.The same is true within the postmodern/emerging conversation. For example, if Willowcreek or Saddleback (the always hated mega church) today decided to call itself "postmodern/emerging" that would not make it so. If a church calls itself postmodern/emerging, just because it is trying to reach a "younger crowd," that self-imposed label doesn’t make the church an actual postmodern/emerging community of faith. Let me restate my opening line again, while I would never (there it is again) say there was an absolute "litmus test" for a postmodern/emerging community of faith I do have to say that there are “standards.” (what is that but a rule to judge by? – putting it in quotes does not change this – now we all really believe in standards to judge something to be what it is – so why play games and act like we do not) There has to be something that marks a postmodern/emerging community of faith. These “standards” may be loose, “unofficial,” and even questionable, (then how useful are they) but I think they are central (read core to their identity – can’t be one without it – so they are not so loose and unofficial after all) to all postmodern/emerging communities of faith; you can see them as a kind of “rule of pinky” (thumbs are too modern) (that is just silly, I would say stupid, but my daughter won't let me use that word any more) that I think we can use to determine if a community of faith is, or is not, postmodern/emerging.How it came to be:At ginkworld.net we receive over 100 requests a month from different communities of faith to be added to the “community of faith listing” (which is vast and growing). And out of those, we may add only 10 to 15. Most of the requests are from churches that are very modern, very "willowback" (read 666) in structure and style. Some of these churches desire to call themselves “postmodern/emerging” not because they are, but because they see “postmodern/emerging” as the “new thing,” the “next-wave” in ministry, the “edge,” or the “cool thing to do.” They have no idea what it means to be postmodern/emerging (who does?). They read Kimball, Sweet, or some other author, and they feel if they don’t catch this wave they'll miss the beach all together. (Well, most of these authors tell people that they are “Missing the point”, that Christianity must change to mirror the culture or be irrelevant etc. There are books, convergences, web sites, conversations, experiences, ad nauseum which say precisely this – change or miss the beach all together) Others desire to be added to our list because they want to “attract and fix” people with a postmodern/emerging mind. One church asked that we add them, and when we sent them a email explaining that they would not be added (we have now stopped giving rejection emails) to explain why we did not add them – they got mad. They were not angry because they were postmodern/emerging and we missed it—they admitted as much. All they wanted was to be listed so they could minister to, as the senior pastor put it, “the lost postmodern believers who are being tricked into thinking that anything but ‘the true church of Christ’ is the answer.”This led us to ask some very important questions:
- Just because they desire to call themselves "postmodern/emerging," must we agree and post them?
- What would we see as central to a “postmodern/emerging” community of faith?
- If we did post those that were questionable, are we being honest to our call?
- Are we being honest to those who are looking for something different when they come to our site to find a “postmodern/emerging” community of faith?
- If we left to a committee (very modern idea) (gasp) to decide, who would be put on?
The question for us became, “How do we decide who to add to a list of “postmodern/emerging” communities of faith and still be honest, open, and direct concerning it? Over time, we developed the following criteria that works for us (always add the “for us” – that eliminates sounding like you are making an absolute judgment – but why can’t a modernist church be a postmodern/emerging church if these are just “their” standards – who are they to judge who is and who is not postmodern). But with all that being said, let me share with you that at some level this is still something each and every person needs to ask him or herself (it is person relative, or “community relative” for the more academically sophisticated postmodern). These are basic criteria, and not, by any means, to be taken as “written in stone.” (can’t do that, can’t be certain – but heck, God did write some things in stone – and those things can be understand by human beings – God reveals by writing some things in stone, and he did give us a book, a Bible – am I WRONG?)
“the rule of pinky” (playful and being cute are postmodern trademarks – they could not say “The Rules that Make You a Postmodern/Missional/Emerging Community – because that would be too “modern” of them.)
- A postmodern/emerging community of faith needs to have a willingness to encourage it’s participants to extend the self to the world around.
- As a gathering, they need to have a desire to see “community” as something more then a collection of small tribes, and they need to be able to see past their own tribe to that of others. They need to move from inside the community to a place of “uncomfort” and be in mission to all.
- A postmodern/emerging community of faith needs a willingness to move past what is, and redefine what will be. While we would never ask them to be innovators, we would expect them not to be imitators. If what the community is seeking to do is imitate another community, then that is not seeing what can be – but only living what is. When people “imitate” that tells us they see this as another “church program” and not a true expression of community and self. (This is a key problem I have with some in this movement – God’s idea was the church – it is not ours to make up as we go – there better be some imitation through the centuries, in fact for all of time, else the gospel is completely washed away by expressing “self” and “community” – Jude 3 tells us differently – that there is something once for ALL entrusted to us)
- A postmodern/emerging community of faith needs a willingness to treat all people as equals. When we say “all people,” we mean all people, regardless of age, race, gender, belief system or any other “box” we can think of, are equal in the eyes of God. (AMEN!!! Equal in God’s eyes because of what we are – made in his image. But let’s not let this thinking degrade into universalism as I have seen on many a pomo message board – Jesus taught that there are sheep and goats)
- A postmodern/emerging community of faith has a willingness to hear the voices of others. The idea that we accept people is cool, but if you are not going to hear them, we are simply speaking empty words; it is not just “hear” it is “listen.” (Sure, this is just being a kind and courteous person. But what does it mean to listen to someone who denies that Jesus is who Jesus says he is – I will love that person, hang with them, but I will not listen if listen means accept the truth of what everyone says – or that everything that someone says is even valuable.)
- A postmodern/emerging community of faith has a willingness to not be driven by programs, building or budgets. It does not center on what it has but on what it can do with that it has. (Again, this is not very thoughtful – if one goes to “do something” one has to take action. If doing it together, it must be organized otherwise you cannot do something “together” – scrap the building – fine by me, but if money is given to the elders of a community of faith it better be stewarded – God requires this – and spending what you do not have is bad news – so you better have a budget. Perhaps what needs to be said is “not by programs, buildings, or budgets” which leave God out, which are prayerless, which give not thought to the Spirit and Word of God.) The idea that there are no standards to be a postmodern/emerging church is just not the case. There may be no “hard and fast” rules (then why exclude others from the PoMo club), and it may be hard to apply the standards. To be honest, all of them do not have to be 100% on the line; there is room for grace. Just keep in mind, I don't think anyone who has written any book with a postmodern/emerging slant has ever suggested that there was no standard. (Good, now let’s just give up the game and talk about what is good, right and true – from our tradition and faith given to us by God)
Anyway, let God (the Trinity) be true, and may our hearts and minds seek after he who is the truth.
Out
--------Spirit and the Word - A Glorious Balance
This morning I listened to to message on the life and teaching of the 20th century English preacher - Martin Lloyd-Jones (see John Piper's manuscript on Lloyd-Jones, audio available in the series Men of Whom the World is Not Worthy). A medical doctor by his early twenties, Lloyd-Jones had a powerful conversion to Christ and experienced an unmistakable call to be a herald of the good news. Among other things, Lloyd-Jones desired to see a powerful visitation of the Spirit of God upon people that was manifested through preacher and vindicated by powerful works of God. This speaks afresh to todays debates within the Christian church as to the role and reality of "signs and wonders" "spiritual gifts" etc. These debates between the "cessasionists" - those who say that such signs and gifts have "ceased" and those generally lumped together as "charismatics" - Lloyd-Jones had strong critique for both and seemed to call for a balance of the two. In other words, signs and wonders never replace the preaching of the gospel. Signs and wonders are not what convert and save sinners. But on the other hand. Such signs never diminished the role of preaching in the New Testament. That messages preached were at times accompanied by demonstrations of the works of the Spirit. The two need not be anti-thetical. Lloyd-Jones offers some good advice for both sides and perhaps carves out well a middle position for those who desire the Word of God to be studied, understood, taught and preached without thinking this means that God cannot show his power in this physical world through certain manifestations of the Spirit. The following two lists may prove helpful - these are directly from John Piper's maunscipt:
Martin Lloyd-Jones' Criticisms of the Pentecostalism He Knew
- He insisted that revival have a sound doctrinal basis. And from what he saw there was a minimization of doctrine almost everywhere that unity and renewal were being claimed (see note 53). The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth and revival will be shallow and short-lived without deeper doctrinal roots than the charismatic tree seems to have.
- Charismatics put too much stress on what they do and not enough emphasis on the freedom and sovereignty of the Spirit, to come and go on his own terms. "Spiritual gifts," he says, "are always controlled by the Holy Spirit. they are given, and one does not know when they are going to be given" (see note 54). You can pray for the baptism of the Spirit, but that does not guarantee that it happens ... It is in his control. He is the Lord. He is a sovereign Lord and he does it in his own time and in his own way (see note 55).
- Charismatics sometimes insist on tongues as a sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit which of course he rejects. It seems to be that the teaching of the Scripture itself, plus the evidence of the history of the church, establishes the fact that the baptism with the Spirit is not always accompanied by particular gifts (see note 56).
- But even more often most charismatics claim to be able to speak in tongues whenever they want to. This, he argues is clearly against what Paul says in 1 Cor. 14:18, "I thank God I speak in tongues more than you all." If he and they could speak in tongues any time they chose, then there would be no point in thanking God that the blessing of tongues is more often given to him than to them (see note 57).
- Too often, experiences are sought for their own sake rather than for the sake of empowerment for witness and for the glory of Christ (see note 58). The aim is not to have experiences in themselves but to empower for outreach and making Christ known (see note 59) ... We must test anything that claims to be a movement of the Spirit in terms of its evangelistic power (see note 60) ... The supreme test of anything that claims to be the work of the Holy Spirit is John 16:14 -- "He shall glorify me" (see note 61).
- Charismatics can easily fall into the mistake of assuming that if a person has powerful gifts that person is thus a good person and is fit to lead and teach. This is not true. Lloyd-Jones is aware that baptism with the Holy Spirit and the possession of gifts does not certify one's moral fitness to minister or speak for God. The spiritual condition at Corinth, in terms of sanctification, was low and yet there was much evidence of divine power. Baptism with the Holy Spirit is primarily and essentially a baptism with power ... [But] there is no direct connection between the baptism with the Holy Spirit and sanctification (see note 62) ... It is something that can be isolated, whereas sanctification is a continuing and a continuous process (see note 63).
- Charismatics characteristically tend to be more interested in subjective impressions and unusual giftings than in the exposition of Scripture. Be suspicious, he says, of any claim to a "fresh revelation of truth" (see note 64). (In view of what he said above concerning how the Holy Spirit speaks today in guidance, he cannot mean here that all direct communication from God is ruled out.)
- Charismatics sometimes encourage people to give up control of their reason and to let themselves go. Lloyd-Jones disagrees. "We must never let ourselves go" (see note 65). A blank mind is not advocated in the Scriptures (see note 66). the glory of Christianity is what we can "at one and the same time ... be gripped and lifted up by the Spirit and still be in control" (see 1 Cor. 14:32) (see note 67). We must always be in a position to test all things, since Satan and hypnotism can imitate the most remarkable things (see note 68).
- This has often happened: in a meeting ... you begins to be afraid as to what is going to happen and to say, "If I do this what will take place?" That is quenching the Spirit. It is resisting his general movement upon your spirit. You feel his gracious influence, and then you hesitate and are uncertain or you are frightened. That is quenching the Spirit (see note 70).
- Certain people by nature are afraid of the supernatural, of the unusual, of disorder. You can be so afraid of disorder, so concerned about discipline and decorum and control, that you become guilty of what the Scripture calls "quenching the Spirit" (see note 71).
Such balance is refreshing, especially from one of the founders of Banner of Truth Trust
Out
--------News - Solar System May Be Unique After All -- Astronomers
After all, the Heavens DO declare the glory of God News - Solar System May Be Unique After All -- Astronomers
How wonderful are your works O God. (Psalm 19)
--------
Anger, Contempt, and Slanderous Speech
Last night I read a great piece on the nature of anger, contempt, and slanderous speech. Now right, what a fun life I lead to read such wonderful topics. But seriously, it was about the teaching of Jesus on anger and our relationships to others in a great book I am reading (Dallas Willard's The Divine Conspiracy - we'll probably blog a bit in the coming weeks on this book). The passage discussed is found in Jesus' sermon given on a hillside - a short but world-changing discourse that philosophers pupils, and preachers have marveled at for centuries. As recorded in Matthew's gospel (Matt 5):
Verses 21,22 - "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.' But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire.1) Anger is a response to others and circumstances which arises when something thwarts our will - we get angry when someone messes up our game plan. Anger in and of it self is not necessarily bad - in fact, there are some things which ought to make us angry. However, anger which lingers, which stews, and boils in the cauldron of the soul becomes a root in the affections from which the most heinous of human evils flows. Jesus said, it is anger towards a brother that makes us liable to judgment. 2) Contempt finds its origin in unresolved anger and resentment of another. It moves past "he made me angry" to "that guy makes me sick" - Insult, contempt for another - Jesus, warns us in Matthew 5 - is a high crime that is worthy of judgment at the council - or the tribunal that ruled on the affairs of people. 3) Slanderous speech! "You Fool!" - moving from anger to contempt into cursing another - for our day saying to another "You Fool" sounds very tame. How can that possibly be that bad of a thing - the word used in the New Testament here is actually "Raca" - a harsh term of abuse used to slander and insult. "That guy is a piece of #%$@!" - would better explain the term in our day. That may sound harsh, but that is the nature of the heart Jesus is describes. To devalue that which God has declared immeasurably valuable - the human soul defiled in the heart and speech of another - it is worthy of hell. How much of the pain in our world - violence and murder have found their seat on the pride and offended will of man which brought forth his anger. James' advice is well taken -
- Quick to listen - showing value to others
- Slow to speak - shut my big mouth, for how much stuff that flows from our traps becomes a trap for others
- Slow to become angry - Why? It does not bring about the righteousness that God desires...nor peace, nor hope, nor love, nor healing for communities, nor passion for the good, nor anything else profitable.
If anger comes because of the view of evil and injustice - may it move us to action - not angry souls at war with the world, viewing all as an enemy. May we ever remember that there is an enemy but it is not your neighbor - such an enemy must be fought with weapons not carnal. Now, what of pacifism? The role of the state to bear the sword of wrath against wickedness (Rom 13) - such will have to wait for other days. Out
--------Is Jesus Smart?
Jesus - cynic, sage, political radical, Son of God, prophet, enlighten guru, rabbi, Savior of the World, the list could go on. The question I have this morning is this - Is Jesus Smart? When one lists "the smartest people who have lived" it is a good bet that Jesus would not make the top 100 on most people's list - even those who are devoted to him as his followers. Why is this? Should a man who began a movement two thousand years ago, which continues to this day, which is growing, which encompasses two thirds of the world's people, be considered a man of no intellect? Let's think for a moment the impact of our own lives on others. What will this world be like two thousand years from now because of your life? Or even the lives of those we consider great and influential today - Clinton, Chirac, Annan, Bush, Putin, Elvis, or Shrek. What will there legacy be on the world of tomorrow? Perhaps a few will be mentioned in some annals of human affairs, but will there be a devoted following of billions? As much as I want my own life to count, to see something wonderful and good come from my own short existence on earth, I realize that it will be nothing to compare with that of Jesus. So, what do we make of this Jesus? I think I must agree that he must have been smart. In fact, I think I would agree, that he is the smartest who ever lived. And through in the fact that he claimed and demonstrated himself to be God incarnate seals the deal for me. I will learn from Jesus and only watch Shrek on DVD.
Props to philosopher Dallas Willard for thinking about and reminding us about the smartness of the man from Nazareth.
Out
--------
A Great Inversion
INVERSION The act of being turned inside out or upside down
To become a disciple of Jesus is to accept now that inversion of human distinctions that will sooner or later be forced upon everyone by the irresistible reality of his kingdom. How must we think of him to see the inversion from our present viewpoint? We must, simply, accept that he is the best and smartest man who ever lived in this world, that he is even now "the prince of the kings of the earth" (Rev 1:5). Then we heartily join his cosmic conspiracy to overcome evil with good.
— Dallas Willard, The Divine Conspiracy
A hope and prayer to see a generation turned upside down to be made rightside up. A depth of understanding, a breadth of love, a well of compassion, availability for service. May this be said of us.
--------
Another great day for the covenant of Marriage
July 24th was a great day rolled up into a great weekend. Kasey and I had the privilege (I always mispell that word) of doing a couple's challenge to two young people at their wedding this past weekend. One of the guys who was involved with our ministry at Va Tech for five years married a great girl - the cultural event in Louisa Kentucky this summer. The weekend was a great time to get away with my own bride for some great time in the car, some good down time away from our girls, and to serve together encouraging this young couple as they start their journey togehter. I was very proud of these two in the way they planned their wedding. It was extremely well done, but not excessive. It was nice for all the guests, but yet humble. There was a gentle and real spirit about the whole weekend - and the Lord was greatly honored. Nothing gives me more hope about the future than to see young people deeply comitted to the Lord and one another. I think they have gifts from God that will help them be on the positive side of marriage statistics.
It was an honor to be a part of this wedding - a rich sense of satisfaction seeing the fruit of our ministry in a fine young man.
--------
Lord Teach Us to Pray
The first followers of Jesus of Nazareth had an interesting question to ask of their teacher. In Luke 11:1 we find a few men asking of Jesus "Lord, teach us to pray". What prompted the question is of great interest to me as I seek to go spend time in prayer today amidst many a hurried distraction.
First we notice in this particular instance Jesus himself had been off for a time of prayer himself. Upon his completion of this time the question arose "Lord teach us to pray. The disciples were prompted to desire prayer as they saw their leader in the practice of prayer with his Heavenly Father. An interesting ending to their petition is also found in the Luke passage. "Lord, teach us to pray as John has taught his disciples." The followers of Jesus had seen something in the followers of John the Baptist - they were people of prayer and were following the pattern and instruction of their leader.
I know myself that when I am around a people of prayer and certainly leaders that pray, my heart too is quickened with a desire to commune with God in that inner sanctum of prayer. Today, my life is full of wonderful things. Two little ones up and going this morning, a wonderful wife and friend, a head splitting with ideas for a new ministry, yet I find my heart asking the same question of my teacher and leader. "Jesus, today, this day, teach me to pray."
- Father, hallowed be your name. Lord, may I fear and reverence you today - for the glorious name that represents to us your beautiful essence and character.
- Your kingdom come. Lord, let me desire your kingdom, your rule, your mastery of my life and your world. May I be filled with a hope of your coming and a desire to lead others in a kingdom way
- Give us each day our daily bread - Lord, as I am living in a land of abundance, where the streams of your blessing overflow, let me live a life of daily dependence on your grace and goodness. Let us not forsake our God in the land of plenty, and be willing and joyful in sharing what we have.
- and forgive us our sins, Lord, let me not become near-sighted and blind, never forgetting your gracious forgiveness of my many sins
- for we ourselves forgive everyone who is indebted to us. Lord, let the roots of bitterness depart from my heart and let me forgive others as you have forgiven me
- And lead us not into temptation - Lord, keep me close to you so that temptation will be discarded when it arrives, keep my feet from the path of the wicked.
On St. Augustine and Hip Hop
Had a great time jogging this morning listening to one of the top evangelical hip-hop groups newest record. During one of the tracks (Forever) I had a funny thought. The lyrics of this rap song are expressing the same Christian sentiment about this world as the great theologian and philosopher of the early church, St. Augustine of Hippo.
If, then, we be asked what the city of God has to say upon these points, and, in the first place, what its opinion regarding the supreme good and evil is, it will reply that life eternal is the supreme good, death eternal the supreme evil, and that to obtain the one and escape the other we must live rightly.Augustine wrote at length on that which is considered the supreme good of mankind. His conclusion was that this life's pleasures, be it food, friends, health, sexual pleasure, etc. all can be lost against one's will. If our highest happiness were to be found in the things of this life, man is doomed to misery and indeed will live without hope. Augustine therefore deduced that the Summum bonum must be that which can be both loved and possessed without being taken from one against his will. In other words, to Augustine, the greatest good for us is not in this life but with God in the next. You may read some for yourself from his classic work, The City of God -Augustine, City of God Book XIX Now, The Cross Movement has some similar advice for modern, urban ears.
So if I'm hit by a car, or taken out by disease, you ain't got enough bullets in your gun Man, please, We're gonna live forever! ...I'm not living for this life, cause I'm living for the next one, I'm living for the next one! Forever, Holy Culture, Cross Movement Records, 2003.So, if man would find joy, happiness, and the supreme good of his own soul, he would be wise to look to that which is eternal and not rife with transience. As the apostle reminds us:
2 Cor 4:16-18 So we do not lose heart. Though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed day by day. 17 For this slight momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, 18 as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.--------
A blessing of a wedding
I married a good friend this past weekend - it was the first wedding in which I was the primary minister. Such a blessing to be involved in leading two people before God to make vows of holy matrimony...
A Quick Quote from the Challenge to the Couple:
Marriage is more than a legal contract. Marriage is more than a civil agreement to jointly order your individual affairs. It is a holy union made before Almighty God and only to be dissolved at death.
We tried to stress the seriousness of the marriage covenant and the blessing and joy of Biblical marriage before God.
Back to some seminary studies in the New Testament
--------
A Thought on a Thought from a Medieval Saint
Writing. To pull aside the mind from the distractions of our day to bring the soul to the contemplation of truth, to put thought down in a clearer form, can appear as if one is called to scale the heights of an icy slope with but flip flops on his feet. Tonight the mind races as I read a biography or the medieval scholastic philosopher
Thomas Aquinas. A quote deeply challenging and quite relevant to many a debate I have had with both friend and adversary has confronted my mind. This is from GK Chesterton’s transcription of a debate between Thomas and Siger of Brabant on the nature of Theological and Scientific truth.
If there is one sentence that could be carved in marble as representing the calmest and most enduring rationality of his unique intelligence, it is a sentence that came pouring out with all the rest of this molten lava [this is a reference to a portion of a fiery rebuttal to the point of an opponent in debate – RM]. If there is one phrase that stands out before history as typical of Thomas Aquinas, it is that phrase about his own argument: “It is not based on the documents of faith, but on the reasons and statements of the philosophers themselves.” Would that all Orthodox doctors in deliberation were as reasonable as Thomas in anger! Would that all Christian apologists would remember that maxim; and write it up in large letters on the wall, before they nail any theses there. At the top of his fury, Thomas Aquinas understands, what so many defenders of orthodoxy will not understand. It is not good to tell and atheist that he is an atheist; or charge a denier of immortality with the infamy of denying it; or to imagine that one can force an opponent to admit he is wrong, by proving he is wrong on somebody else’s principles, but not on his own. After the great example of St. Thomas, the principle stands, or ought always to have stood established; that we either not argue with a man at all, or we must argue on his ground and not ours. We may do other things instead of arguing, according to our views or what actions are morally permissible; but if we argue we must argue “on the reasons and statements of the philosophers themselves.”
At times I have heard that we cannot reason with an unbeliever because there are no common epistemic grounds by which we can argue. I have always wrestled with this. What is the point in persuading anyone (2 Cor 5:11) if one cannot understand the language and rationale by which we attempt to persuade? Now a man may deny reason in order to hold conclusions contradictory to his own arguments – but such a man does not lack common ground, he lacks honesty. He will not admit to his own reasoning. His mind understands, yet his will remains obstinate – such is the state of the man at enmity with God – he will turn and cannibalize himself only to prevent his turning to his Creator. Like others before him, he simply will not come (John 5:40).
Curtis Chang in his excellent book “Engaging Unbelief – a captivating strategy form Augustine and Aquinas” gives a strategy which seems to follow the Thomistic maxim above. Enter a friends story on her terms, understanding it well according to her arguments. Retell the story by her own reasoning exposing its tragic flaw and inconsistencies. Capture the story correcting the flaw with the truth of the gospel. The gospel will capture the truth in the position, exclude its error and free us to see clearly on the other side.
I do not think for once that Thomas is suggesting that we abandon our own presuppositions to argue by way of another’s. It is precisely because we see by our faith that we can argue by way of another’s principles. If we were blind men we would not see well enough to not step in another’s dung heap. But because we do see by the light of faith we can kindly say “Sir this is dung” and then via his own nostrils and soles of his shoes demonstrate it to be such. Then we may suggest to him: “You would do well to avoid this steamy pile, behold there is another path to trod – and upon that path we may follow the one whose sandals we are unfit to tie.” If one then chooses and persists to wallow in dung – such is his lot.
With the foolishness of preaching and with an apologia for the hope that I have.
Out…
--------
Helping a good friend on the bloggin road
Today, I am setting up a new friend on the blog trail. A promising young writer who wanted a place to put down thoughts, write some articles, etc. Why not blog? Welcome to the world of blogs - both mindless, senseless, and hopefully one more that is profound
Out...
--------
On the Road for a couple of weeks
The next few weeks we will be on the road a bit:
- Preach at our church in Blacksburg, VA
- Spend 2.5 days in Ohio at AIA Headquarters
- Officiate a good friends wedding
- Some Vacation Time with Kasey's Family
- Back to Tenn
Life at 26,000 feet.
Last night I was on a plane landing in Nashville descending down from 26,000 feel. I looked and saw all of the small individuals lights - the lights of homes, stores, automobiles, and street lamps all became visible even from such a loft height. I began to think about how each of those lights has a purpose in the world "down there." To illuminate a home, permit reading in a late night hour, to bring light to dark alleys for safety, to pilot cars through the darkness on to their destination. Lights supporting life down below. I then thought of all the individual lives that these lights are serving - and I felt small. There is such a smallness in being human. We travel through space a breakneck speeds, on a rotating sphere comprised of ores, oceans, and organisms. The thoughts of the Psalmist began to travel in my mind. "What IS man that you are mindful of him!" Even more so, who am I amidst these millions of lights and lives taking place in the saga down below?
The startling truth that rings through in the message of Jesus is that among the billions of people who are living and have lived, every individual is vested with a glory unknown to any other part of God's creation.
He does love the sparrow, yet we are more valued. He clothes the flowers in beautiful splendor, yet we are more loved. Not one hair on our heads is missing or has fallen to the earth unnoticed. One small life, one significant small light.
As I looked away from the city into the darkness of the earth from 26,000 feet, I could not help but think about how lights illuminate the darkness, cast out fear, and bring truth to confusion. How much more does God intend his people to shine forth in a world darkened and broken by sin.
Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, we do not lose heart. But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God. And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. 2 Corinthians 4:1-7 - ESVWe are but small people, but oh what light and treasure does God place into our broken jars of clay. --------
The Passing of a Statesman
The news has been filled today with the remembrance of Ronald Reagan, the 40th President of the United States. Both sides of the political frakus in America has given evidence to the character and respect gained by one man over a long and diverse journey.
One quote I heard today stood out to Kasey and I:
The problems we're overcoming are not the heritage of one person, party, or even one generation. It's just the tendency of government to grow, for practices and programs to become the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this Earth. And there's always that well-intentioned chorus of voices saying, "With a little more power and a little more money, we could do so much for the people." For a time we forgot the American dream isn't one of making government bigger; it's keeping faith, with the mighty spirit of free people under God. State of the Union 1984
It reminds me of a quote by another great statesmen of times only remembered faintly.
Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams - 2nd President of the United States
--------
Caring for a family in new lands
Kasey and I are in Tennessee land these days. We have moved and have been "close" to finishing unpacking for several days - just when we are almost there - another box surfaces. I am really praying for wisdom in loving and leading my family in these days. Kayla is doing great; all of life is an adventure for her. She is really enjoying having her Daddy around so much. I too am thankful to be with her so much. Ky hasn't adjusted well with the move throwing off her schedule - that has made the nights a little longer than they were in Virginia. It will be quite a while before Kasey has a new schedule with the girls so her life seems a little bit thrown for a whirl - she has been such a hard worker in getting the house together. She is starting to be a little hard on herself for not getting it all cranked out. We just need to live in grace with one another and the transition. On to bed time fun with Kayla...
--------