Eternal Perspectives

Donna, in response to Philip Yancey’s article about worship being much more than just the music during a service, left the following comment to my post pointing to it:

In all the time I have spent in church, I have always associated ‘worship’ with music because that is the only context in which I heard the word mentioned. I remember when it hit me for the first time about a year ago that worship isn’t about the music. I was reading casually (not studying) in Genesis 22 where Abraham was taking Isaac to sacrifice him, and stopped when I read:

22:4 Then on the third day Abraham lifted his eyes and saw the place afar off. 5 And Abraham said to his young men, ‘Stay here with the donkey; the lad and I will go yonder and worship, and we will come back to you.’”

I couldn’t get past that passage. They went to worship? It sounds funny now, but I thought ‘It didn’t say anything about musicians going along on the trek’, and that is when I realized that there was something I had not been told in church about worship.”

I attend a Bible church and am your basic hands-in-my-pockets or clasped-behind-my-back kind of guy when it comes to singing during the service. Not everybody shares my superior view of this practice, however, and so I notice those individuals who raise their hands while singing. I have learned to let them be who they are and enter into the presence of God however they see fit (like they really needed my permission to begin with).

Being the way I am, I sometimes find myself wondering why no one raises their hands during the offering. (more…)

Stacy at Media Soul draws our attention to an interview in Beliefnet with the author of a new book on sex and single Christians. Stacy writes,

As a therapist I found this article to be extremely truthful because most of the unmarried Christians I see in my office have had or are currently engaging in sex. Some of my clients like to negate oral sex as not being real sex, but the truth is that any sex outside of marriage is sin, and it’s totally wrong.

As a distant colleague, I found the article to be an accurate depiction of what I, too, have heard in my consulting room. There is a lot of sexual activity going on among unmarried believers that falls outside the bounds of what God has ordained to be appropriate, i.e., sex within marriage.

Someone once said that the problem with premarital – and, I would add, extra-marital – sex is not that too much is given, but rather not enough is given. That is, sex is only right within a relationship where a permanent commitment has been made. Without that kind of commitment, sex is more of a fantasy than a reality, a purely physical experience that strips the act of its deeper emotional and – especially – spiritual dimensions. We are little different in those moments than two dogs hooking up in the park or someone masturbating while viewing porn.

This is a struggle, obviously, for single people – whether Christians or not – but it is also a danger for those of us who are married. To have a shallow or incomplete theology of sex is to fail to enter into and enjoy the fullness of a wonderful gift from God. None of us every fully achieve the glory of sex, but without knowing its true purpose and design we will stray far from the ideal. We won’t even begin to approach it.

Philip Yancey, whose writings I find to be somewhat uneven – he is either deeply profound and moving or somewhat trite and boring; but, then, who is not? – has nailed an important point on Christianity Today’s website.

In an article entitled “A Bow and A Kiss,” Yancey decries the recent equivalence of worship with music. Hopefully, the following quotes will prompt you to read the article in full:

How did it happen that the word worship became synonymous with music?”

For several months my church went on a hunt for a “worship pastor,” and a parade of candidates auditioned with their guitars and backup groups. Some of them prayed, yes: “Lord, just, you know, really be here tonight with us, just let us know you’re here.” None showed much knowledge of theology, and assuredly none led us toward anything like awe. Worship today means loudly filling every space of silence.”

Redman continues exploring the borderland between friendship and fear, for authentic worship encompasses both. It is the proper response when a holy God extends to flawed human beings an invitation to intimacy.”

Please read the whole article. It’s an important corrective to an unfortunate drift away from experiencing God.

Christianity History and Biography has an article on Middle-Earth available online. “Good and Evil in Middle-Earth” is written by Ralph C. Wood, University Professor of Theology and Literature at Baylor University. Wood discusses the Christian underpinnings of J.R.R. Tolkien’s classic works.

Note: see my previous post below, or click here.

A couple of other things that I would pray for Godbloggers if I actually did pray for Godbloggers:

Ears to Hear

We don’t seem to do a very good job of listening to one another; I am no exception. There are times when I am reading a post that I am struck by an idea and chase it wherever it leads, all the while continue to “read” the post in front of me. (We all tend to do the same thing when in a conversation or argument: we’re thinking about what we’ll say as soon as the other person shuts up.) Then I either write my own post or enter a comment that is only tangentially connected to the original post. Whatever the author was actually saying turns out to be just a springboard for my own vain thoughts, and I lose the value of another’s input.

Perhaps even more frequent – and more tragic – is when someone disagrees with us on our blog and writes a comment to that effect. We are prone to respond defensively to criticism, whether it is constructive or not, offered in love or not. We do not always give their point of view a proper hearing, feeling offended instead and responding with a dismissive retort. And the discussion goes downhill from there.

Of course, we also hijack one another’s comments section. Somehow we cannot discipline ourselves to follow the lead of the blogger and instead take the discussion off in our own direction, usually to our favorite little hobby horse or pet peeve. When we do that, however, we discourage and frustrate an in-depth exploration of that issue or idea the author initially put before us. It is as if we ignore her points in order to make our own. Another opportunity to learn is lost.

We like the sound of our own voice; we like to see our own words on the screen before us. After all, who can say it as well as me? Which leads to my last and, perhaps, most important non-prayer for the Blogdom:

Humility

Whether we are or not, we often come across as arrogant and having an inflated sense of our own importance. Our blogs sometimes are ethereal examples of Paul’s warning: “Knowledges makes arrogant” (1 Cor 8:1 c). Humility, says James Sire, is a virtue without which “every virtue begins to become a vice.” In his section on intellectual virtues in Habits of the Mind, he writes,

Lack of humility – arrogance – is, in fact, one of the most frequent charges against intellectuals . . . The real problem, however, is not the charge that you are arrogant but the distinct possibility that you actually are.”

Quoting Weaver, he continues:

‘What do you desire? Vain glory? Profit? Then you are but a pseudo-intellectual.’ We must take our cue from the great Christan intellectuals of the past: They knew ‘that the proud theologian was a living contradiction in terms.’”

Middleton:

It’s not the childlike asking of questions or the honest admission of doubt that will get you into trouble with God. It’s the unstinting belief, the confidence, the certainty that you – that I – have all the answers, either because we’re smart, or because we’re honest, or because we’re scientific, or because we’re Christians, or because we have a Reformational worldview.”

It does no injustice to Middleton to add, “or because we have a Dispensational theology, an Arminian perspective, a Kingdom Theological approach, or any other system of doctrine that forms our worldview.” One of the best lessons I learned in seminary was Dr. Bruce Demarest first presenting and then dismantling Covenant, Dispensational, Kingdom, and Promise-Fulfillment theologies in order. The lesson? No system of theology can do justice to all the material; all fall short and either distort or omit critical passages or principles. Therefore, hold your theology firmly but gently: you are undoubtedly wrong at many points.

(Dr. Demarest, by the way, was one of the more humble men I have ever met. Although he has a remarkable mind and trained under F.F. Bruce to gain his doctorate in New Testament, he never held it with an attitude of superiority – even when some Moody Bible Institute students verbally attacked and ridiculed him in class. I caught a glimpse of Christ through him.)

Still borrowing from Sire, who quotes Neuhaus:

Few things have contributed so powerfully to the unbelief of the modern and postmodern world as the pretension of Christians to know more than we do . . . If Christians exhibited more iintellectual patience, modesty, curiosity, and sense of adventure, there would be fewer atheists in the world, both of the rationalist and the postmodern varieties.”

Don’t get off on election here: his point is valid and important. We are not very attractive at times, neither to unbelievers nor to one another. One more quote:

Describing the state of knowledge centuries ago, Thomas Aquinas said, ‘No philosopher has ever been able completely to know the essence of even a single fly.’ He was right then. And Lewis Thomas is right in our age: ‘We do not understand a flea.’”

Why we act as though it is otherwise is a reflection of our immaturity. There are, of course, many things that we can know with certainty: they are the declarative statements of the Bible. But the moment we venture into interpretation, we should take with us ample caveats and sufficient humility to allow that we might be wrong.

We do not possess omniscience. We have but a smattering of wisdom. We have much to learn, even from the most unlikely of sources. If we do not learn, if we cut ourselves off from those who “have nothing to say to us” because they are from a different tradition, then we have no one but ourselves to thank for our continuing ignorance and inevitable stagnation. We do not walk in wisdom when we do so.

I have written elsewhere about my concerns that too many unqualified people are making dogmatic, general statements about matters they do not fully understand. In some ways, this is a counter-balance to that post. We do need to be discerning but we should never dismiss someone’s observations without having first listened. All deserve to be heard, although not all should be given the same authority when they speak. We must be discerning enough to reject what is false, but humble enough to admit when they are correct and we are wrong.

It’s in quotes because I don’t really pray for the blogosphere. Maybe I should, but I don’t. I do pray for some individual members from time to time, when God brings them to mind or I’m aware that they’re going through a particularly tough time at present.

Like Joshua at Razorskiss (”Sorrow“). I pray for him because he opened his heart and bled all over his blog. That takes some courage. And strength. So I pray and thank God for him.

If I did pray for the Blogdom of God (not the aggregator, but all of us Godbloggers), here are some of the things I’d pray for (or, “for which I would pray”) and why. No certain order.

Love

In a couple of ways:

Biting our tongues. First, that we’d be better at interacting with one another in a gentle and Christlike way. I’m not talking about those times when somebody is railing against this person or that church and clearly needs to be confronted and rebuked. There is a time for harsh words, if that’s what it takes to get the other person’s attention or to at least demonstrate the importance of the issue.

No, I’m talking about the everyday posts and – especially – comments we leave on one another’s blogs. Before going any further on this one, let me admit my own failure: I was unkind and unfair to Eric of Ales Rarus in a comment I left last week at Evangelical Underground. I apologized later, but the harm was already done. My sin. No excuses.

Any of you who have read more than a handful of comments around the Blogdom know what I’m talking about. We rip into one another as though we have just found a mortal enemy, someone who has endangered or threatened that which is essential to life. We are demeaning, dismissive, condescending, and hateful.

We would do well to remember that the tongue about which James warns us (Jas 3:7-10) extends to the fingers that rest upon the keypad of our computers.

With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way.”

Most of us probably shy away from the use of profanity towards one another – at least in public or out loud – but James tell us in no uncertain terms that we are cursing image bearers with what we say and how we say it. So, I’d pray that we would not do that so much, if at all.

Loving our toes and elbows. A second facet of loving has to do with accepting our differences. We are different, after all, and we will always be different in this lifetime – and, to some degree – even in the new heaven and new earth (don’t turn this into a debate about the eternal state: stay focused!).

We are members of a Body – we say we know this, but our behavior at times betrays our unbelief – and thus we have different functions and purposes. Some are better at one thing and some at other things. That’s a good thing, because there are some things I not only cannot do but do not want to do. But this has nothing to do with having different value or importance, although it may affect how visible we are to one another.

It is striking to me to see that many of us – who deeply treasure and value our individuality – are so unkind to those who are not like us. The irony, of course, is that if it were not for them we would lose our individuality! More on this later.

But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired. If they were all one member, where would the body be? But now there are many members, but one body. And the eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you’; or again the head to the feet, ‘I have no need of you’” (1 Cor 12:18-21)

God has seen fit to make us interdependent; it is foolishness and immaturity that makes us go off on people who disagree or see things differently. At the risk of making this metaphor walk on all fours, think of it like this: you may be an eye and have the ability to see far beyond what others can view. Yet, without another eye that has a slightly different perspective on things, you have no depth perception and can only see things in a flat, two-dimensional field. You see, but you have no depth. You can tell yourself otherwise, but you have limited yourself needlessly.

We need one another because we are different, not in spite of our differences. God knew what He was doing and, if we really believe Him and trust Him as we say we do, we’ll start appreciating the differences He intends for us to have. Let others be who God intended them to be; don’t try to make people they way you want them to be. Which is probably more like you.

Identity in Christ. Some of us need to stand out and be different, some of us are terrified to do that; in both cases, if we are doing it because of our needs, we are living in the flesh. One is not worse than the other, although the former is certainly more irritating than the latter.

There are those in the Blogdom who are careful to steer a middle course and not take a position that is even remotely against the tide or likely to draw attention to ourselves. To the extent we do that, we neglect our gifts and deprive others in the Body from benefitting from what God has entrusted to us. Spiritual gifts are community gifts, not personal ones to be used or enjoyed just by ourselves. We all have something to contribute: don’t hide it under a bushel or bury it in a field (Mt 5:15; Mt 25:24 ff.).

This flip side is no less true. More than a few are compelled to always go against the flow, as though the only way they can define themselves is by the contrast they create. They always take the minority view, always see things differently, tend to be negative, and are shrewish with their praise.

Though they appear to be loners and strong, they are actually isolated and weak: they fear that they will not be able to maintain their identity if they join the throng, and thus they must pull away to salvage their sense of individuality. Many times they seem bitter; underneath they are just hurt.

The solution for both of these weaker brothers is the same: an understanding and acceptance of who they are in the Body of Christ. All have something to give, all have something to learn; all are different in some way, all are the same in some way. Like the flowers in a field, we are all unique; like the flowers, however, we are more beautiful and healthier when we are clustered together and sharing our similarities.

God created us for community; in order for community to exist, there must be individuals that make up the community. We are not intended for co-uniformity. The one and the many, the many and the one; diversity in unity, unity in diversity.

We all struggle to find a balance in our lives between individuality and intimacy. Christ Jesus has created that balance for us in His Body. Learn to be a part of the Body most of the time; learn to be apart from the Body at other times. You are always a part of the Body and you never stop being who you are.

If you’ve noticed any improvements (mostly technical) about this blog, it’s not any of my doing: through Amy, I learned of Valerie, who has taught me a lot about what’s OK and what’s not OK, why my feeds weren’t working, and stuff like that. And, as a freebie, she tossed in the favicon that you can see if you use Firefox. IE users: well, once again, you’re denied. Sorry. Talk to Billy G.

Better yet, she fixed the problems; best of all, she’s inexpensive – but not cheap. So if you need some tweaking done, send her an email!

(She’s also quick: I got all this done in less than eight hours!)

NOTE: Tim Challies has written a related blog, “Blogging and Accountability,” that provides another perspective and suggests possible ways of addressing the problem.

This post is about postmodernism (PoMo) and its presence in that corner of the evangelical subculture often referred to as Godblogs. It is not meant to be a definitive treatment of the philosophy of postmodernism or of the exploding phenomenon of blogging in the Christian community. It is, rather, a plea for caution and reason, a cry for all of us to stop and examine what we are doing and why we are doing it.

Others are far better equipped than me to examine and explain the meaning of postmodernism for the church. Albert Mohler did a three-part series, “Truth-Telling is Stranger Than It Used to Be,” at his site on March 1-3 of this year. It is a good introduction to the subject for those of us who may have been late catching the bus the day it was covered in class.

For a more thorough, in-depth look at PoMo, seek an assessment from those who understand philosophy well and also are serious about their Christianity. Jeremy Pierce at Parablemania is a good place to start when looking for Christian philosophers in the blogdom, along with other sites like Prosblogion and Fides Quaerens Intellectum. To know more about blogging, read Hugh Hewitt’s book, Blog.

Keep all of that in mind as you read this. My areas of expertise are to be found elsewhere: in theology, discipleship, and biblical anthropology. Maybe in writing and journalism, too, since I was a reporter for more than a decade from the late ’60s into the early ’80s.

Perhaps more importantly I have been walking with Christ for 30+ years. I have been told that I have the spiritual gifts of teaching and wisdom, but I don’t know that with any certainty. So read what follows with some discernment, please.

PoMo is insidious: it spreads like a virus throughout the body of Christ, invading reasonably healthy cells here and there. It changes the internal structure of the infected cell and begins to replicate itself. Often the cell has no idea of what has happened, only that some change has occurred and things seem to be different now.

It is also an evolving, somewhat-nebulous philosophy. Of the many heads on this ear-tickling Hydra, one in particular has triggered the present post: PoMo is characterized by an erosion of authority. Mohler has written,

Since postmodern culture is committed to a radical vision of liberation, all authorities must be overthrown. Among the dethroned authorities are texts, authors, traditions, metanarratives, the Bible, God, and all powers on heaven and earth . . .

“Ultimately, the authority of God is rejected as totalitarian and autocratic. Christians–especially Christian ministers–are seen as representatives of this autocratic deity, and are to be resisted as authorities as well.”

Nowhere, it seems to me, is this minimizing of authority and leveling of the value of opinions more apparent than among Godblogs. We are blessed, to be sure, by the presence of experts in a variety of disciplines but, for every William Dembski or John Mark Reynolds, there are hundreds and thousands of untrained and unqualified bloggers willing to pontificate on subject matters and issues that they only marginally comprehend.

Certainly everyone is entitled to an opinion but not all opinions are of equal value or should be given equal weight in determining biblical matters and Christian living. Too many bloggers are unwilling to post their qualifications and expertise, thus providing their readers with insufficient information to assess the merit of what is being said. Those more gifted in writing clearly or compellingly can give the appearance of knowledge without substance truly being present. Reasons that sound good, the adage warns us, are not the same as good, sound reasons.

This post was prompted specifically by a post regarding the problem of pornography and men, including Christian men. A cause was pronounced and a cure announced; the support in both cases was anecdotal, lacking in either biblical support, research, or even surveys to back up the claims. The article was well written, however, and the strength of the author’s belief in his position was evident. Spiritual language was sprinkled throughout the post and the solution was simple: be more spiritual. It was persuasive, perhaps, to many; some have indeed cited it and praised it on their own blogs. Plus, it’s the kind of answer we want to hear.

I am not unqualified to speak about such matters. I have trained in this area, have researched and written about biblical anthropology/psychology (albeit unpublished), and have worked and continue to work with men addicted to pornography. What was being offerred as a solution in the aforementioned post is rarely the cause of the addiction and the solution, while correct, was so general as to be useless. The cause of addiction or indulgence in pornography is multifaceted; healing cannot be reduced to a simple formula or a single prescription.

Nevertheless, a lot of people will be affected directly and indirectly by what was written. I have no doubt that the author loves Christ, seeks to glorify God, and desires to help others. But – and this is where PoMo crashes the party – he appears to believe that his opinion is as valid as anyone else’s in this matter. He disagrees with published authors, rejects their conclusions, and presents his own diagnosis and cure in its place. This is the decline and dismantling of authority about which Mohler warned.

I have been called an elitist before because I have questioned the equal value of all opinions; it is likely I will be called that again. If that is what I am, so be it. But is such “elitism” a bad thing? Let me posit the following in conclusion.

If your child were desperately ill and in need of immediate medical care, to whom would you turn and whose advice would you heed? Would you go to a physician who was a specialist in such matters or would you ask one of the Geek Squad members at Best Buy? Or a veterinarian? Chemist?

If you suddenly inherited a substantial amount of money and wished to invest it wisely in kingdom initiatives, would you seek counsel from a psychologist? An auto mechanic? Bank teller? Or would you find a Christian financial planner/adviser to help you make a wise decision?

In matters of biblical truth, spiritual issues, and eternal consequences, to whom should you turn? Is the opinion of a new believer as valuable as that of an older Christian who has walked consistently with Christ for perhaps longer than you have been alive? Is the conclusion of someone who dabbles in Hebrew and Greek after work or on the weekends of equal worth as that of a genuine exegete? Is the leader of a Bible study or Sunday school class as qualified as a professor at a seminary or Bible college?

We are careful about our physical health and money, as well we should be. But such things pale in significance to the importance of eternal truth and biblical living. The Bible and the Christian life are not things to be taken lightly or to be treated as common. As mentioned previously, we all have our own opinions – and we will be held accountable for those positions and teachings we proclaim to others. Jas 3:1 is but one of many verses that reflect the importance of “accurately handling the word of truth” (2 Tim 2:15).

If we are as serious about our faith and our beliefs as we say we are, then we must exercise great care and caution in listening and reading one another. We cannot allow others to make decisions for us. We absolutely must model ourselves after the Bereans (Ac 17:10-11) who, upon hearing the preaching of Paul, studied the Scriptures for themselves to make sure that what was being said was according to the word of God. We can afford to do no less.

A Pew(ny) Commentary

It was my contention, in a previous post of this series, that Jonah’s prayer to God fell short of biblical repentance. Whether or not you agree with my position has little bearing on the messages of Chapter Three of this remarkable look into the life of a patriotic, petulant prophet sent to preach a message of judgment to a wicked city in an evil country.

Before reading this present chapter, it is important to understand the difference between a missionary and a prophet. Missionaries, both in biblical times and today, were sent to deliver a message of good news and salvation to people in various places. They brought with them hope and the prospect of life.

Not so with the prophets. These mouthpieces for God, usually sent to God’s own people in Israel, Judah, or both, were sent to deliver a message that was unwelcomed by its recipients. Prophetic messages typically announced God’s displeasure and pending judgment on the people and the land. To have a prophet suddenly show up in your city or town was a bad tiding, indeed.

Chapter Three

How much time has transpired since Jonah was – literally – thrown up on some shore of the Mediterranean is not known. There is no reason to conclude that the prophet immediately went northeast to Nineveh; in fact, it is likely that he instead went to Jerusalem to pay the vow he had made upon his deliverance from the storm via the great fish (Jonah 2:9).

1 Now the word of the LORD came to Jonah the second time, saying,
2 ‘Arise, go to Nineveh the great city and proclaim to it the proclamation which I am going to tell you.’
3 So Jonah arose and went to Nineveh according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceedingly great city, a three days’ walk.
4 Then Jonah began to go through the city one day’s walk; and he cried out and said, ‘Yet forty days and Nineveh will be overthrown.’”

Jonah is sometimes pointed to as evidence of a “second chance” that God in His grace grants to rebellious children. That may be: it is true that Yahweh does forgive and offer additional opportunties to do the right thing, but it would be presumptuous for any true believer to sin now with the intention of obeying later. God is under no obligation to extend a second chance and frequently chooses someone else if we balk or refuse. Just because Jonah got a second chance does not give us any assurance that we will have a similar chance. To play now and pay later is a risky course of action to pursue.

As alluded to previously, Jonah may have been in Jerusalem when Yahweh commissioned him again and commanded him to go to Nineveh to announce His judgment. I, for one, would like to think that God waited for the prophet to return to the temple and fulfill the promise made while covered in the slime of gastric juices from the belly of a fish. (more…)

Nancy Pearcey in Total Truth (see link in sidebar) makes the following observations:

When our natural needs become a cause of anger and bitterness, or a reason to oppress or attack others, then we must say no to them as well. For example, it’s perfectly proper to want intimacy and respect in our marriage. But people are sinners, and at times even Christian spouses may find themselves lonely and unloved. Then one of two things will happen: Either we will become angry and reject the other person – or we will learn how to die to even our valid personal needs, and trust God to work good even in an imperfect situation.

“As Martin Luther put it, Christians embrace a theology of the cross, not a theology of glory . . . True knowledge of Christ comes only as we are willing to give up our dreams of glory, praying to be identified with Him on the cross.” – p. 357, 358

This is not a popular idea but, if we are truly to resist being conformed to this world as we are commanded to be, we will have to be willing to suffer. This is not to say that there are not times when divorce becomes a necessary, lesser-of-two-evils course of action or that we have not been called to peace. It is to make a strong statement that God is pro-marriage and we need to be committed to it even as He is. And not just the institution of marriage, but our own marriage, regardless of how difficult or troubled it at times might be.

Thanks, but no. I appreciate the offer, but for what it’s worth, I don’t think I’ll jump on the bandwagon of the Emergent Church Movement just yet. I’m holding out.

No, what I’m waiting for instead of the Emergent Church Movement is the Detergent Church Movement, one that will emphasize cleaning up the sin in believers’ lives (like mine) and in our doctrine (again, like mine). This, I think, is a lot more important right now than another “latest thing” movement.

Take Tide, for example. A “Tide Church Movement” could remove that nasty stain of sin, including gluttony (”fresh food”) and drunkenness (”drink”). That’s a movement worth getting behind, don’t you think?

So join me in my hold out, eh?

Be a member of the Detergent Church Movement.