Living the Gospel, Part One

Happy New Year, 2015.

Its been a while since I've written… That's not entirely true. Its been a while since I've posted. I'd call it writer's block but I don't think that's entirely true either. Feels more like transitional block; that unsettled feeling you get when moving from one paradigm to another. Unguarded and a bit vulnerable. Like that sensation you get when you are moving to a new location or before a job interview: you know everything is changing and yet you wonder just how far reaching the change may be. It's unpredictable. I dare you to move is the challenge. Sometimes we simply wait to see what will happen. The most apostolic among us rush headlong into the void. I've played both ends against the middle in fits and starts.

Over the past few years, perhaps the last five or so, I've largely been occupied with a pursuit to understand what I believe. Why do I believe? What substantiates my belief? What does it mean? Theology. I didn't know it at the time; perspective becomes more clear with some distance. There was no grand plan. I held no particular roadmap. “The wind blows where it listeth.” And while I'm certain that it “didn't just happen” in that the sovereignty of the Lord is always in play, I realize now what I did not understand then. In other words, I knew the details of what I was doing but did not see the greater pattern. I was looking to systemize my theology; to make some sense out of the connections and questions. My efforts were spent on gathering as much knowledge as possible regarding only one of those two questions every man asks: “Who am I” and “Why am I here?” Hindsight and reflection can be very workable tools. In that mirror, then, I find that most of what has recently captivated my attention pertains to matters of identity (“Who am I?”). In a world stuffed with pre-packaged proposals, it seemed necessary to look to original sources, and those who would cite to that authority, to answer the question. It was, and is, a worthy objective and one for which I have no regrets. I liked the landscape and enjoyed the walk; I have not yet arrived.

But the books, aside from scripture, have begun to lose their luster. Especially the new ones. Summer has faded to Autumn and the once colorful foliage is now “dry leaves on the dirty ground.” And while old books will combat the prejudices of the current age, I nonetheless feel as if the news cycle is beginning to repeat itself. I've already read this “late breaking” report on the crawler. The authors are beginning to repeat themselves; they are beginning to repeat eachother. I've already seen this movie.

To be sure, almost no journey is complete so long as there is breath in our lungs. Like Bunyan's pilgrim or MacDonald's Anodos, there are always Frost-y “miles to go before I sleep.” Nonetheless, if we are paying attention the quest for knowledge evolves into understanding; and understanding, with some experience, ages into wisdom. I am hopeful that will come to pass in my own life.

In this season, the quest for right thinking is being wedded to a conviction for right living. Not a self-righteous, therapeutic moralistic “right living” soapbox. Being “better” than a neighbor is not the goal. It'd be a lousy objective and a petty life if that was all that was offered. Rather, the compulsion of living the gospel has hijacked my thinking and taken center stage at the county fair. Living it, in all of its glorious and messy beauty, is the metanarrative, the biggest idea. It is both/and not either/or…

And it comes with plenty of questions…

Questions that constantly pull at the sweater thread of what I think I have already learned… What does it mean to live the gospel, the good news?

Isaiah 52:7 says, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace, who brings good news of happiness, who publishes salvation, who says to Zion, 'Your God reigns.'”

What does it mean to have beautiful feet? And how is the good news published today? To whom and for how long? 

I recently heard a Texas pastor state that Sunday morning teachings without greater application are akin to using “a BB gun against a battleship.” 

Francis Schaeffer, in “The Great Evangelical Disaster” said, “The freedom that once was founded on a biblical consensus and a Christian ethos has now become autonomous freedom, cut loose from all constraints… And when this happens, there really are very few alternatives. All morality becomes relative, law becomes arbitrary, and society moves toward disintegration. In personal and social life, compassion is swallowed up by self-interest… At this point the words "right” and “left” will make little difference. They are only two roads to the same end; the results are the same. An elite, an authoritarianism as such, will gradually force form on society so that it will not go into chaos-and most people would accept it.“

So, that's our setting. This is where the chapters of our book are played out. Here is our stage. Against this backdrop, what does it look like to live the gospel? To really live the gospel? Not to play church, not to moralize, not to engage a new legalism…but to live the gospel. Like Jesus Christ.

Over the next few weeks, let's look to the Word together and develop this idea. We'll find some answers together; not all of them, but the ones that set us on the right road. The Spirit will lead. Stick with me. As the newscasters said many years ago, "Film at 11.” 

And Happy New Year.

Golf, Gratitude and Humility

Golf, Gratitude, and Humility

Yesterday I played my first round of golf in fifteen years. I played once about a year and a half ago but I don't count that 18 holes. It resulted in a hernia repair surgery and, as such, I'd just as soon forget it. The whole story may also have something to do with me busting up an outdoor concrete staircase and sidewalk with a 15 pound sledgehammer the day before... But I digress... Yard work is yard work and the whole experience was unpleasant and costly. As Gilda Radner of Saturday Night Live fame remarked, "nevermind, then..."

So, I repeat: yesterday, I played my first round of golf in fifteen years. My early morning team was completed by my son, Keeton, my law associate, Drew, and his father, Jim. It was good company. And we played the area's easiest course: the Bicknell country club. It's not really a country club. In actuality, it has more in common with a cow pasture than a premier course. Flat, wide open and forgiving: it was the perfect place to begin again. A new birth of sorts.

Like riding a bike or remembering how to swim when thrown into deep waters, I didn't play as bad as expected. Somewhere between bogey golf and whatnot, I found my sea legs again. I need some time at the driving range and I need a whole lot of weekly golf... But I remembered the fun of companionship and the feel of familiar clubs. I remembered the joy of the scenery. And I remembered the peace of simply being in the moment. A cold, wet morning with slow greens that gives way to a later warmth and a slight breeze; a slow start and a good finish; time with friends and, as Mark Twain opined, "a good walk spoiled."

But most of all, I remembered a friend.

I miss him.

You see, the Bicknell county club is where we decided we would learn to play golf together. Years ago. I would drive to his house and we would take his red truck through the country. Winding round the bends, past the old dilapidated mine, and over 15 miles of corn, beans and dirt, we would journey to this beginner's course together. No one would know us. We learned to play in anonymity and without embarrassment. We learned together; he was my friend.

I've thought about him a number of times throughout the years and I've talked to him once and again... But our paths separated and we travelled different roads. I know now, in my mid-forties, what I did not know in my early thirties. Had I known then what I know now, I would have used a different iron and I might have laid up instead of clubbing through. While I don't regret certain decisions I earlier made, I do mourn the loss of a relationship or two. And his is one of them.

He made a significant contribution to my life. Today, I am trying to pay it forward to another friend of mine and, as such, I hope his legacy lives on. He was my law partner, my friend, and a good man. I want to be for my legal associate everything and more that my friend was to me. My former golf partner took a flyer on me when few else would. He invested his time and learning in me when friends were hard to find. And he was long suffering when I routinely tried his patience. I want to be that man for others. I learned more than a few lessons from him. In a word, I am grateful for his contribution, friendship, experience and legacy. I still look up to him.

It occurs to me that I am now the age he was when we first began our adventure together. That seems significant. In fact, it is downright humbling. I am reminded of both my friend and what the Lord my God has spoken:

"[I]n humility count others more significant than yourselves." Phil. 2:3(b)

"When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways." I Cor. 13:11

And

"He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?" Micah 6:8

Lessons in humility are valuable; they are life changing. And they hurt. What is most valuable comes with a cost. Treasures are not free.

If our paths ever cross, I will buy a round of golf and once again enjoy his witty company. We are now states apart, but even chance meetings are not so chance. I'll keep my fingers crossed.

Like I earlier said, I have remembered the joy and peace of the slow start that finishes well. Perhaps there is humility to be found there as well...

My hope and prayer is that he, you and I finish well.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Draw Like a Boy

Draw Like a Boy (or We are Moved by the Spirit)

Dr. Leonard Sax and his important, influential work, "Why Gender Matters," first came to my attention as a result of listening to lectures given by Andrew Pudewa. The former is an American psychologist and practicing family physician and the later founded the Institute for Excellence in writing. Both have had an impact on the education of my children.

In his opus magnus, Sax details the myriad of gender differences between boys and girls and how the same affects education and behavior. For instance, attention is given to the difference between male/female vision: boys have more rods than cones and girls have more cones than rods. This genetic structure causes a difference in visual perception. He also dedicates a large number of pages to diversity in hearing and mathematics instructions. However, for purposes of this short article, the most profound dissimilarity he discusses is the manner in which vision affects perception.

Sax explains, "The reality I was trying to understand...is the fact that when you give young children a blank sheet of paper and a box of crayons, most girls draw people, pets, flowers and/or trees. Most boys try to draw a scene of action at a moment of dynamic change. That's a robust empirical finding, valid across race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. That doesn't mean that ALL boys try to draw a scene of action; some boys draw exactly what the girls draw. But boys are more likely to draw a scene of action, such as a monster attacking an alien; girls are more likely to draw people, pets, flowers, or trees, with lots of colors. The people in the girls' pictures usually have faces, eyes, hair, and clothes; the people in the boys' pictures (if there are any people) often are lacking hair, clothes, often the boys draw mere stick figures in one color. How come? The usual answer "Because that's what we teach them to do" is unpersuasive, as I explain in Why Gender Matters. On the contrary, many of these boys insist on drawing these pictures not because teachers tell them to draw such pictures, but in spite of the teacher's repeated pleas, 'Why do you have to draw such violent pictures? Why can't you draw something nice - like what Emily drew?'"

Andrew Pudewa, at a recent event, summarized this particular portion of Sax's research as follows: "Boys like to draw verbs while girls like to draw nouns." This statement was perfectly illustrated by the young family sitting directly in front of my wife and me. Two well behaved and quiet little girls were drawing pictures of sunshine, houses, horses and family. They used multiple crayons and barely stirred as they drew. Their brother, however, used one dark blue crayon to color the entirety of his car-crashing, fire-exploding, chaotic attack of a picture. And he was much more animated as he drew with arms waving and flailing!

I'm certain that we could all find an exception to this rule. There is always an exception. But that's not the point. The point here is to find the rule, not the variation to it. Why?

Because God is asking us to draw like boys. To be fair, He is also asking us to appreciate beauty and detail as illustrated by a young girl's picture of her family and horse. But He is asking us to draw, with our lives, like a boy. He is asking for the use of verbs, not just an appreciation of nouns. He makes this request via the Holy Spirit and it is indeed the Spirit that empowers us to live a life of verbs.

Scripture repeatedly pronounces that we are filled with or full of His Spirit in order to act. We are provided His Spirit to draw like a boy; to engage in verbs! Let's look at just a few of the biblical mentions where individuals were filled with God's Spirit:

Exodus 28:3 "You shall speak to all the skillful, whom I have filled with a spirit of skill, that they make Aaron's garments to consecrate him for my priesthood."

Micah 3:8 "But as for me, I am filled with power, with the Spirit of the LORD, and with justice and might, to declare to Jacob his transgression and to Israel his sin."

Luke 1:67 "And his father Zechariah was filled with the Holy Spirit and prophesied, saying..."

And

Acts 4:8 "Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, "Rulers of the people and elders..."

There is a pattern. A purposeful pattern. In each verse we see that we are first filled or full of the Holy Spirit and then action (verbs!) result: filling then making, filling then declaring, filling then prophesying, and filling then speaking. Even a halfhearted attempt to further review the scripture will yield dozens of additional examples in this vein.

This pattern, principle, and truth was hammered home as I recently studied Exodus. Verse after verse, chapter after chapter details tabernacle instruction revealed from God to Moses. Specifics are provided for curtains and clasps, coverings and corners, bars and bowls. And there is artistry: gold carvings, cherubim woven into the tapestry, the mercy seat to cover the ark, and more. This is not hodge podge. This is excellence. And, after an intimate level of detail is provided, what does the Lord do? He fills His people with His Spirit to accomplish all that He has intructed. Look again at the first verse listed above, Exodus 28:3. There are more verses just like that -- the Lord filling so that we are empowered to act in obedience to all that He has proclaimed. (See Exodus 31:3 and 35:31).

Unfortunately, like a non-action, stayed scene resembling only a portrait, "The church has sought to guide the spiritual lives of its members in very practical, reasonable ways. That sounds like a compliment. It’s not. Contrary to Western thought, spirituality is anything but reasonable and practical". -- Jeff Woods

We need to start drawing like boys.

Let's pick a crayon.

Let's start using verbs to advance His kingdom.

The Spirit is provided, we simply need to act.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Walking it Out

Walking it Out

“We don’t need to add “spiritual” activities to our life as much as we need to make our actual, everyday life spiritual. . . .” Alan Hirsch "Right Here, Right Now.”

Some thoughts show up on the front porch of your mind with bags packed to stay. At times, you may think they have gone, but they're only hiding. When you least expect it, there they are again at the kitchen table. Always wanting to talk about the same thing. They are similar to a reoccurring dream in the broad daylight.

I've recently had such a visitor.

It's been in the basement of my mind for quite some time. It's now found the steps. I've been wrestling with ideas of missionality and ministry; the "modern" church and all that is entailed in what we think of as Christianity. A conclusion has gradually arrested my attention: if an individual is not already engaged in mission with God, there is no programing or posturing, meeting or leadership group that will work to organize what is not already organically happening.

In other words, it is the responsibility of the individual believer to join God on His mission. Once folks are engaged, they can be "organized." However, the organization cannot and will not ever create a mission for or in the individual. The mission is God's, the obedience is ours and the organization belongs to...well...the organizations. Think about it this way, the Father has declared the mission through His word and His Son. As a result, we can choose to be sub-missive. We can operate under (sub-) His active mission (missio/mission/missive). When we are already engaged, we can be organized. But organization does not create direction, it channels it.

Mission is defined and determined by God and organically occurs in the life of the redeemed. It is obedience and it happens where the Logos, the Word, takes root in good soil. It does not happen as the result of organization, leadership or clever meetings. We join God on His mission when we become obedient to and through the Holy Spirit. He is the Missio Dei, the sending God. He is already engaged in His mission of redemption and are to join him in the family business.

And, really, this drives us back to the need for spiritual reproduction: disciples begetting disciples as opposed to disciples attempting to create a discipleship strategy! This is the Word in action in the life of the Believer. As illustrated by Jesus Christ, there is mission and action prior to organization or "strategy".

This is the principle illustrated in a simple cup of water.

Matt. 10:42 And whoever gives one of these little ones even a cup of cold water because he is a disciple, truly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.

Mark 9:41 For truly, I say to you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ will by no means lose his reward.

Matt. 25:37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

The disciple acts missionally simply because he or she is is a disciple. The cup of water is extended to the least of these not because a focus group on local outreach determined the best action plan but because disciples are already busy about their Father's work. The folks in Matthew 25 didn't even know there was an organization option, they simply acted in obedience and were pleased by the results! This, of course, is always the major hat trick; a life engaged in the Father's family business. Personally, I continue to struggle with the push and pull of professional conflict and aggression within what is to be a missional life of peace in Christ. It's not easy. There are days I would like someone else to be sub-missive for me. And there are days where I would like to put off my mission onto the organization.

But there is no shortcut to the resolution of this tension. It is only answered by a life of obedience to the Holy Spirit; walking in the Spirit as opposed to the flesh.

Without a doubt, it is much harder to walk than it is to write.

Nonetheless, we are call to obedience. We are called to work with our Father. And we are called to mission. We would do well to remember that our mission is a calling and our organization is a preference. One comes before the other. Mission first then organization.

God speed us on His way and to do His work.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Rock, Paper, Scissors...

Rock, Paper, Scissors..

Or whatever happened to absolutes and what is relativism anyway?

“Whenever you find a man who says he doesn’t believe in a real right and wrong, you will find the same man going back on this a moment later. He will break his promise to you, but if you try breaking one to him he’ll be complaining ‘it’s not fair’ before you can say Jack Robinson.” C.S. Lewis.

In our newly minted post-modern society, every nuclear family has one. Every extended family has at least a few. And in our public policies, morals and ethics we find that, in reality, we are greatly outnumbered. They are more than relatives; they are relativists. While our relatives may be relativists, there is a big difference in defining the two terms. The former, of couse, needs no introduction and is used here only for the purposes of word play and jest. The later may now be the predominant philosophy of our culture and, as such, merits its time under the microscope.

Relativism is also known as relative morality. Relative, in this context, is defined as "dependent on relation to something else, not absolute"; morality here means "the practice of right conduct or duties; virtue; ethics; discriminating between right and wrong; verified by reason." Relativism is the idea that there is no absolute standard of right and wrong - all morality is relative to one's circumstances, culture, education, personal opinions, etc. Moral relativists believe that there is no law or commandment that is universally applied to all men. They teach that we create our own truth and that what is right for us might not be right for the next guy. So, we each end up with our own personalized but equal version of the truth.

It is, however, a non-sustainable philosophy which is eventually crushed under the weight of its own inconsistencies. As someone wiser than me once quipped, every man is a relativist until someone steals his watch. Or, perhaps, his wife or child, freedom or dignity. At that point, we all become absolutists. Values indeed may be relative to the individual; but that does not mean, in truth, that all relative values are equally correct, valuable, honest, or truthful. There has to be a standard by which true value is determined. If there is not, we have the collapse of all, including morality, law and truth itself. Some things must be fixed, uniform, immovable and concrete. Even as our self-appointed, new age prophets state that values are relative and that we must not "judge" or "impose," they have broken from relativism and stated what they believe, but will not conceed, to be an absolute. The relativism game cannot be played consistently without constantly changing the rules.

Because I believe the Genesis account of creation, sin and consequence, I do not believe that man, as man, is basically "good." I question, in a relative philosophy, how that term can even be defined. If you and I allow for various subjective interpretations, we cannot both be right and still maintain any consistent standard or definition by which others can declare goodness or badness. Jesus Christ himself says, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone." (Mark 10:18 and Luke 18:19). In some sense, even those who do not subscribe to a Judeo-Christian philosophy, and who worship another god, would concur. "Goodness" increases the more one looks like the god whom they have declared good. This is true even if the god being worshiped is self. (See my last post regarding man on the throne of his own heart). The problem of relativism again rears its head, however, when we begin to talk about multiple gods who are ascribed equal authority.

One of the additional fallacies within the larger philosophy of relativism is the inherent problem of mutually exclusive truths. This is often and consistently the case with the philosophy. If there is not a larger, objective, absolute standard of truth, if every individual is his or her own "god" and can subjectively determine what is true, how do we reconcile the inevitable and multiple inconsistent truths which we will necessarily reach. How can the mutually exclusive honestly co-exist as truth? They can't. If two "truths" on the same subject do not agree, then one or both are false. Nature teaches us there are absolutes: mathematical truths, scientific truths, biological truths, medical truths, chemical truths - all absolutes. Why, then, would there not be an ethical, moral, spiritual truth? Why would our ethics be the exception to the rule we see active in every other area of our world?

A philosophy of relativism verses a philosophy of absolutism will lead to different conclusions. As a point of clarification, while I am convinced "true truth" (a term coined by Francis Schaeffer) is absolute, I am well aware that we have wills that are free to disregard the absolute. While we may not be free to ignore the consequences of our disregard of truth, we are all certainly at liberty to reject the absolute. Based on this conviction, then, while it is my responsibility to shine a spot light on the truth, it is not my duty to ensure that another receives that truth. This, I think, is one of the differences between those who would proclaim the gospel (and honestly and decently attempt to live it) and those who would attempt to co-opt it for a lesser agenda. Spiritual truths transcend man's agenda. Those who would attempt to use the absolute as a club to beat others into submission have a fundamental misunderstanding of the truth itself as well as the application to his or her life. Jesus Christ refused most of the "political" debate of His time. Many in His society would have crowned Him a political revolutionary (in the nature of Barabbas) or a national king (to overthrow Rome). He was neither; the purpose was much larger than the politics and thought of the day. The purpose was eternal, not temporary; restoration not revolution. Additionally, the gospels show very clearly that Jesus expected some to reject His teachings; that they would walk away. At times, He seemed to even encourage it. Never did He attempt to compel another to believe. There is invitation and challenge but not compulsion. Today, we see many who would attempt to bastardize eternal truths for personal and temporal gains. I do, however, take some solace in knowing that no matter how poorly an ambassador may represent his emmisary, the ambassador is not the emmisary. We must look to the king and not necessarily his representative if we are to understand his true nature. I would suggest that I have no absolute understanding of truth, but Christ does. As such, my understanding should continually comport with His as the standard.

Absolutism, however, for the sake of absolutism is pointless. Even this philosophy is not above corruption or decay. The value and truth of absolutism depends solely upon to what the absolute is anchored. Who or what is the fixed standard; the concrete and immovable? For this reason it is necessary that there be an ultimate authority. If there is not, and we are left with the inconsistent and various individual truths at which we arrive, then there is really no reason to feed the poor, help the helpless or search for truth. If, ultimately, there is no authority and we ourselves determine the right and wrong subjectively, then the greedy wall street bastard is as right as Mother Theresa and the rapist is as righteous as the saint. What would then be the point of attempting to convince any other of the merits of an argument if we first approached the argument from the “conviction” of tolerance, no ultimate authority and only relative truth? Under such a system, no idea, thought or value is any better or worse than another so why even enter the fray of the debate? By what authority, under a relativist ideology, does one appeal to the other? Such an attempt would be intolerant in and of itself unless there existed a higher and more ultimate authority to which we have recourse. There is simply no way to reconcile relativism to itself as a consistent worldview and action plan. By its definition it negates the value of action and is incapable of long term reconciliation of viewpoints. Unfortunately, as a whole, our world does not understand the limitations of a relativist philosophy any more than it understands the philosophy itself.

That said, I am an absolutist only because I believe (a) there is an ultimate authority and (b) the ultimate authority is the trinitarian God who, through the second person of the Godhead, Jesus Christ, reconciled man to Himself. In John 14:6, Jesus famously stated, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father but through me.” That is an absolute statement. He is the way: He is the way to the truth and He is Himself the truth. For such a statement and others, I am left with an absolutist conclusion. Here's the problem that Christ presents for every one of us: He does not leave the door open for acceptance only as a good man, fine teacher or intellectual prophet. He claimed to be God. (John 10:30-39; John 17:5, Mark 14:61-62 and many others). He acted as though He were God, said He was, did not rebuke others for accepting that He was, and was apparently convincing enough that most of His first century disciples were violently killed for advancing the proposition that He was, in fact, God. This, then, leaves us with only one of two choices: we take Him at His word, believe that He is God and the only way to the Father; or we dismiss Him as the most insane and delusional of the mentally ill lunatics who have also claimed to be God. But acceptance as a good man is not possible if He was a liar. Acceptance as a good teacher is not possible if He was basing all of His “truth” upon a lie He was perpetrating. And acceptance as an intellectual prophet won't work if He was a delusional madman.

Based upon what I see in this world around me, based on what I know of my own heart, and based on what my own experience shows me, it is inescapable that the conclusion is the first: He was exactly who He said He was. If that is then true, I must take what He said as revelatory truth and act upon it. The result is that if I am to truly follow Christ, I become the absolutist that He was. When He says “Follow me,” I do not have the option of dictating the terms; I follow based on His. It is certainly not a popular theology or philosophy these days. Truth, however, has never been beholden to the masses. When we believed the earth was flat, it was not. And truth then, just as it is today, will not be held hostage to popular sentiment. Truth is transcendant, not mundane; eternal, not culturally evolutionary. If it were anything less than promulgated by an ultimate authority, then we would be back at relativism and would have no basis for even looking for the truth. In that scenario, we simply determine our own and thus end the story and the search.

But our hearts, our nature and our eyes tell us that there is something more.

And so we keep looking.

It helps to look in the right places.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Location:Burnett Ln,Vincennes,United States

You're Not as Valuable as You Think

You're Not as Valuable as You Think

And neither am I.

"You go girl!" "You've got this one, man!" "This is the way God made me..." "Don't let anyone tell you different." "Just look inside yourself and you'll find the strength you need." "I'm affirming my own self worth."

Or as Stuart Smalley from Saturday Night Live said years ago, "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me." (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-DIETlxquzY)

Ugh!

Our world is overflowing with bumper sticker slogans and feel good platitudes designed to make us feel fantastic about ourselves. Spend ten minutes on your Facebook newsfeed and try to tell me differently. If we don't count the cat pictures and game advertisements, a sizable portion of the pictures, posters and status updates focus on issues of esteem, identity and self. Truth be told, we already feel pretty darn good about ourselves; the incessant reminders to feel great are really only our clever marketing plan to sell an even better feeling about who we are. And we are a voluntarily captive market! Even the self-loathing among us are narcisists. At the end of the day, those who think too highly of themselves and those who think too little of themselves have both thought too much and too often of themselves. We live in a society that worships self. A society that has decided to worship the creature instead of the creator. Rom. 1:25. Sociologists who understand truth call this worldview "anthropocentric," man at the center. Man on the throne of his own heart. Man as king.

This is a problem.

"For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned." Rom. 12:3

Instead, scripture says that we should be "theopocentric," God at the center. Man is to be overthrown by the real King. The throne belongs to Him.

"So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God." 1 Cor. 10:31

"For you are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's." 1 Cor. 6:20

and

"And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him." Col. 3:17

Quite simply, worship is a foregone conclusion. We were made to worship. We WILL worship. There will be a king on the throne of our lives. The question is what or whom will we worship. The creature or the creator. Us or Him. God or man. A quick reality check is provided by reviewing your resources. On what do you spend your time, money, emotions, thoughts, and energy? An honest assessment will result in a clear picture of your God; whom you worship. Have we each remade God in our own image? What does your polaroid tell you?

There's a choice. There is always a choice. Intuitively, we know this. We may choose to ignore the truth, but it is still the truth. In many of his writings, John Piper articulates the decision to be made as follows:

“The question is, Do you feel more loved by God when he makes much of you, or do you feel more loved by God when He frees you and enables you, at great cost to His Son’s life, to enjoy making much of Him forever?
Let me shorten it down so you can hear the essence of it. Do you feel more loved by God because he makes much of you or because he enables you to make much of him?” Excerpt From John Piper's contribution to Giglio, Louie, "PASSION."

Do we want to spend our lives making much of ourselves, feeling loved only when others, including God, make much of us? Or will we spend our lives making much of God Himself? Who will we declare as the sovereign of our heart, mind, body and soul? Will we insist that God, like self and others, worship us? Or will we choose to worship Him.

He is the creator; we are the creation. "But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, 'Why have you made me like this?'" Rom. 9:20. He is intrinsically valuable; He is value Himself. Ours comes only from Him and His good declaration. "Woe to him who strives with him who formed him, a pot among earthen pots! Does the clay say to him who forms it, ‘What are you making?’ or ‘Your work has no handles’?" Isaiah 45:9. Nonetheless, we are chosen (John 15:16, Eph 1:4) and we are loved (John 3:16) by the Potter.

We, then, are not valuable but rather valued.

“But does God’s love make me valuable? Answer: No. That message is not in the Bible. There is nothing in us that makes us valuable. The fact that God values us says something about God. It says nothing about us. God did not set His love upon you because you have something going on that your next-door neighbor doesn’t. We are not valuable in ourselves..." James Macdonald, "Gripped by the Greatness of God."

Can you image Family Christian Stores selling a t-shirt that reads, "I think too much of myself and so do you?" How about a viral post that says, "I must decrease so that Jesus can increase?" (John 3:30). Perhaps the new Chris Tomlin single will include the lines, "I'm not enough/It's not about me/I'm not valuable/Like momma said I'd be."

And yet, that is the truth of the matter. Our worth is determined by WHOSE we are; it is not created by WHO we are. This value is given to us, not generated within us, by the one who is supremely valuable and makes the only real declaration of goodness. Gen. 1:31. He values us. We are valuable only because we are valued. Apart from Him we are nothing.

So, let's spend our time making much of Him, not making much of ourselves. Let's not think of ourselves more highly than we ought but rather always retain our God, the truly valuable, in our thoughts. Let's rejoice in the knowledge that we do not need to strive to create our own worth. Instead, let us praise the one who has given us value because we are valued by Him. Amen.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Location:Burnett Ln,Vincennes,United States

In the World But Not of It

In the World But Not of It

My recent thoughts and prayers continue to return to this idea:  we are in the world but do not belong to it.  Nowhere in scripture is the "in-not-of" principle articulated quite so directly or simply.  It's not a bumper sticker slogan that you can find in a single verse.  If it were, we'd probably find a way to take it out of context as we silk-screened it on our t-shirts.  Nevertheless, the idea is contained within God's word and is most closely matched in or deduced from the following verses:

"If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you."  John 15:19

"I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world.  I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one.  They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world."  John 17:14-16

And

"Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him."  1 John 2:15

Certainly, we should also consider a companion verse, "I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.” John 16:33

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German pastor during the rise and power of the Nazi party.  In his influential besteller, Eric Metaxas describes Bonhoeffer as a pastor, prophet, spy and martyr.  During his brief life, he stood against both Nazi atrocities and the malaise of the German church.  After Bonhoeffer's imprisonment for his work with the fledgling and brash "confessing church," Adolph Hitler personally provided the order for his execution.  The Fuhrer's hatred for Bonhoeffer no doubt also resulted from his nemesis' involvement in a failed assassination plot on his life.

While in prison, Dietrich wrote often to his young fiancé, Maria.  In his correspondence, Bonhoeffer indirectly provides something of a commentary on the precious verses and our discussion:

“And I do not mean the faith which flees the world, but the one that endures the world and which loves and remains true to the world in spite of all the suffering which it contains for us. Our marriage shall be a yes to God's earth...  I fear that Christians who stand with only one leg upon earth also stand with only one leg in heaven (12 August 1943).”  Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. “Letters Papers from Prison."

Within this scriptural reduction to common axiom an important truth is concealed.  We are to live in this world standing on both legs while looking forward to the day we will stand together in His presence.  While the world was initially pronounced "good," sin has entered and with it the curse.  Like man made in God's image, all of creation groans for redemption.  Romans 8:19 & 22.  What then does it mean to stand in this soil on two legs?  There is, after all, a continuing curse and the ever cumulative consequences with which to deal.  Even our natural laws acknowledge increasing disorder.  In plain language, the second law of thermodynamics states that we cannot break even.  That is, we cannot return to a previous energy state because there is always an increase in disorder.  Entropy always increases.

Nonetheless, by way of the Father's common grace, the curse does not hold complete sway over the entirety of creation.  All has not fully succumbed to the shadow.  We see through a glass darkly, but we still see.  1 Cor. 13:12. Though we will not fully see Him while we remain trapped in fallen flesh yet to be glorified, we see enough of Him now to stand in awe and to be amazed!  The common grace of God keeps us from becoming too blind to see.  Theologians describe common grace like this:  it is the grace God gives to creation as a whole. In this universal non-saving form of grace, God allows the sun to shine upon both the righteous and the unrighteous. God shows his goodness to all people when He feeds them, allows them to work, experience beauty, learn and have joy. It is also common grace that restrains the wrath of God until a later time.  Louie Giglio recently wrote that, "We may dwell in the lowlands, but we have been high enough, often enough to carry something special in our lives as we walk the streets of earth."

It is in this residual goodness that we can fully stand today while awaiting our hope of tomorrow.  Make no mistake, Biblical hope is not wishful thinking.  True hope is a present knowledge of a future certainty.  It is not pie in the sky, rope-a-dope thinking.  Hope provides a life fully lived now and a life fully lived later.  It is not an either/or conundrum; it is a both/and proposition.  "Follow Me."  It is coming to terms with the truth that eternal life begins the moment Christ arrives on your individual scene.  As Jon Foreman belts out, "I'm ready now, I'm not waiting for the afterlife."  Perhaps C.S. Lewis was a bit more articulate when he said, "Earth, I think, will not be found by anyone to be in the end a very distinct place. I think earth, if chosen instead of Heaven, will turn out to have been, all along, only a region in Hell: and earth, if put second to Heaven, to have been from the beginning a part of Heaven itself.”

Within this realization we find answers to many of the questions, causes, concerns, policies and politics of the day.   This knowledge provides us with real perspective on what it means to be fully human today and fully spirit always.