Praise Me.

We can all think of someone who is constantly telling you how great they are, or fishing for compliments, wanting people to fawn all over them. It’s not an attractive personality trait and we cringe when we see it.  (If you can’t think of someone…maybe it’s you!)

A young CS Lewis thought of God this way, annoyed by God’s constant demands for praise, especially in the Psalms. Lewis describes his discomfort, “I found a stumbling block in the demand so clamorously made by all religious people that we should ‘praise’ God; still more in the suggestion that God himself demanded it. We all despise the man who demands continued assurance of his own virtue, intelligence or delightfulness; we despise still more the crowd of people around every dictator, every millionaire, every celebrity, who gratify that demand.” (Reflections on the Psalms).

Lewis isn’t wrong; God does demand praise. It’s is everywhere in Psalm 144-150 (the reading for today). The phrase ‘Praise the Lord’ appears repeatedly throughout these chapters. Sometimes it is actually the word Hallelujah – not a command, but an interjection of praise. Other times, however, it is an imperative, a command (hallal). This command, ‘Praise the Lord’ appears twenty-five times in the Psalms alone. In addition, there are many more related commands, like ‘extol the Lord’, ‘worship the Lord’ (5x), ‘glorify Him’, and ‘sing to the Lord’ (10x).

As Lewis wrestles with this, he considers what we mean when we say God ‘deserves’ praise or a painting ‘deserves’ admiration. We certainly mean more than it is admired – people with bad taste admire ugly stuff.  Nor do we mean ‘deserves’ in the sense that some injustice has been done if the painting is not admired. What we mean, in Lewis’ words, is that “admiration is the correct, adequate or appropriate, response to it…that if we do not admire we shall be stupid, insensible, and great losers, we shall have missed something.”

Lewis eventually understood that God demands praise not out of insecurity or need, but out of a desire for his creation to enjoy the supreme goodness and beauty that is God. It is in worship that God “communicates his presence to men” and we can best appreciate the “fair beauty of the Lord.”  Lewis takes note that all enjoyment “spontaneously overflows into praise” unless stifled. This is true of a good book, a good meal, a landscape, etc. Our praise, Lewis rightly concludes, is actually the completion of our enjoyment, “its appointed consummation.”  It brings our enjoyment to its fullness.

In other words, God commands our worship because allows us to more fully enjoy Him. Let me encourage you to take time to worship and praise God this week. It can be in song – Sing to the Lord!
It can be in prayer. Probably we don’t spend enough time in praise as we pray; petitions tend to crowd out praise. It is good for you; according to Lewis “praise almost seems to be inner health made audible.”

A Liturgy for Those Flooded with Too Much Information

In a world so wired an interconnected,
our anxious hearts are pummeled by
an endless barrage of troubling news.
We are daily aware of more grief, O Lord,
than we can rightly consider,
or more suffering and scandal
than we can respond to, or more
hostility, hatred, horror, and injustice
than we can engage with compassion.

But you, Jesus, are not disquieted
by such news of cruelty and terror and war.
You are neither anxious nor overwhelmed.
You carried the full weight of the suffering
of a broken world when you hung upon
the cross, and you carry it still.

When the cacophony of universal distress
unsettles us, remind us that we are but small
and finite creatures, never designed to carry
the vast abstractions of great burdens,
for our arms are too short and our strength
is too small. Justice and mercy, healing and
redemption, are your great labors

And yes, it is your good pleasure to accomplish
such works through your people,
but you have never asked any one of us
to undertake more than your grace
will enable us to fulfill.

Guard us then from shutting down our empathy
or walling off our hearts because of the glut of
unactionable misery that floods our awareness.
You have many children in many places
around the globe. Move each of our hearts
to compassionately respond to those needs
that intersect our actual lives, that in all places
your body might be actively addressing
the pain and brokenness of this world,
each of us liberated and empowered by
your Spirit to fulfill the small part
of your redemptive work assigned to us.

Give us discernment
     in the face of troubling news reports.
Give us discernment
     to know when to pray,
     when to speak out,
     when to act,
     and when to simply
     shut off our screens
     and our devices,
     and to sit quietly
     in your presence,

casting the burdens of this world
upon the strong shoulders
of the one who
    alone
is able to bear them up.

Amen.

- "A Liturgy for Those Flooded with Too Much Information," Every Moment Holy, Vol 1, Douglas K. McKelvey.

Further Meditation on God's Wisdom

Yesterday I posted some thoughts related to God's wisdom as it is revealed in the story of Joseph. I kept thinking about it last night and into this morning, and am all the more in awe of God's wisdom.

In essence, I came to the the conclusion yesterday that if Joseph hadn't been sold into slavery, we're all going to hell. How did I come to this fairly startling conclusion?

Joseph being sold into slavery, though a series of convoluted machinations, places Joseph in a place of tremendous influence in Egypt, second only to Pharaoh. In this role, Joseph institutes a plan that will save thousands of lives during a seven year famine that God warns of in a dream. Among those lives saved are Jacob (Joseph's elderly father) and Joseph's brothers. These men represent the covenant community, the descendants of Abraham and Jacob that will become Israel.

If this small group of sojourners die of starvation (and they would have had Joseph not provided them grain), God's promise that Abraham's descendants would be numerous would fail. And, God's promise that Abraham's seed would be a blessing to the nations would fail too. If they die, there is no Israel; no Israel means no Messiah to bless the nations; no Messiah means we're still in our sin.

That was my thought line yesterday.

Then I started to question it and said to myself, "Surely, God would have found another way!"

But that's not right. That God is all wise means God never has to go to Plan B. He chooses the right plan - the right goal and the right means to achieve it - from the outset.

And because God is good and holy, we can be sure Plan A is a good and holy plan - a perfect goal and just means to accomplish it. Because God is all knowing, no unforeseen circumstances will arise and force him back to the drawing board. Because God is Almighty, no force can stand in his way when his plan has been determined.

Saying God is Wise means no Plan B is needed!

Job 42:1-2:
Then Job replied to the LORD:
      2 “I know that you can do all things;
         no purpose of yours can be thwarted

Isaiah 14:26-27
      This is the plan determined for the whole world;
         this is the hand stretched out over all nations.
      27 For the LORD Almighty has purposed, and who can thwart him?
         His hand is stretched out, and who can turn it back? 

God's wisdom

This morning I am studying the story of Joseph, getting ready to speak on God's wisdom for the men's group. It's such a familiar story, it's all the more striking when some new insight hits you. And that's what happened this morning.

Joseph is sold into slavery by his jealous brothers. He endures life as a slave, mistreatment by Potiphar and his wife, incarceration and more. He's been betrayed and forgotten. But God is wise.

Eventually, due to some disturbing dreams Pharaoh has (dreams play a huge role in Joseph's story), Joseph ends up in the court of Pharaoh in a incredibly influential position. Pharaoh's dream warned of a long famine that would follow on the heels of years of prosperity. In  wisdom, Joseph helps Pharaoh make ready for the years of famine by storing up grain during the years of plenty. In so doing, he is instrumental in saving the lives of countless thousands of people.

And here's where the story gets fantastic. Some of the people he saves are his own family - his scheming, treacherous brothers and his aging father.  His wisdom rescues them from starvation. That, in and of itself, makes the story really cool. But consider that Jacob (Joseph's father) and his brothers are the descendants of Abraham and Isaac. They are the covenant community. They are the people that become the nation of Israel. They are the forefathers of the Messiah.

So here it is...

If Joseph isn't sold into slavery, he doesn't find himself in Pharaoh's court preparing Egypt for famine.

If Joseph isn't sold into slavery, Jacob and his brothers die of starvation.

If Joseph isn't sold into slavery, there is no Israel.

If Joseph isn't sold into slavery, Jesus isn't born in Bethlehem as Messiah.

If Joseph isn't sold into slavery, we aren't saved by Jesus from our sins.

If Joseph isn't sold into slavery, I am going to hell for eternity.

Lets all sing with the apostle Paul:

      33 Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
         How unsearchable his judgments,
         and his paths beyond tracing out!
      34 “Who has known the mind of the Lord?
         Or who has been his counselor?” b
      35 “Who has ever given to God,
         that God should repay them?” c
      36 For from him and through him and for him are all things.
         To him be the glory forever! Amen. (Romans 11:33-36)

Finding the Right Balance in Family Bible Reading

This morning I will be sharing with the Mom's group at ECC on the topic of family Bible reading.  Our family has certainly had it's ups and downs, its trials and errors, and its successes. There have been, shamefully, periods where we've gone months without consistent Bible reading together. And, there's been other periods, more regular and more sustained, when we've read the Bible together faithfully.  During all of it, there are a few things we've tried to keep balanced.

1. Regularity vs. Legalism
We certainly want to be regular in our ingestion of God's Word together as a family. But we've not been legalistic about it either. If we miss a night or two, we don't stress about it. Last night we went to my nieces last IU game at home - it was senior night. It was awesome and went into double overtime, ending in an IU win (Karlee played extremely well). We didn't get home late and kids were tired, Caleb still had homework to do, etc.

So, we didn't do devotions last night. Doing so would have been overly burdensome. Insisting we do so would have been legalistic.

Now we have taken, at times, this libertarian approach too far and fallen out of a real habit. That's worse. But you and your family need to find the right balance.

2. Big Story vs. Little Stories
Growing up I knew all the little stories of the Bible. When we played Bible Trivia (and we did often), I was pretty good.  Christian school, Sunday school, my parents, my dad's sermons, etc., all taught the stories of Bible.

But it wasn't till much later that I could put these together in a comprehensive way - in a way that reflected an understanding of the Big Story of the Bible.

I think that trend has been reversed in my kids. They know the Grand Story...I've told it over and over again. Our church emphasizes it. We've read devotionals that teach it. But, I'm not sure they know the stories like Gideon, Ehud, the story of the rich man and Lazarus, etc.

Both are important. In fact, the Big Story is hard to tell without certain of the small stories. And the point of the small stories is easy to miss if you can't put them in the context of the Big Story. So find the right balance.

Note: using the word story with your kids...we emphasized that the Bible stories are true stories, not stories like Hansel and Gretel or Dr. Seuss. 

3. Moral Lessons vs. God's Provision of Salvation
The Bible stories teach moral lessons. David was a courageous young man. Daniel stood up for what was right. Ruth was loyal. Amen. Our kids need to hear these moral lessons and need to have good exemplars of the faith to model. And, there's biblical precedent for this - simply look at Hebrews 11 where Abraham et al are held up as models of faith leading to action.

But these stories aren't about moral lessons; in fact, Moses, Daniel, David, etc. - they're not the heroes of the stories. God is!

At one point when we were teaching through the stories of the OT, we had a little ritual. I'd tell the story, make my wise, fatherly/pastoral comments, and then end with a question, "What's the point of the story?" The kid's response was "God saves his people!" 

Teach the morals, but never lose sight of the real point of the stories!

4. Paraphrases vs. God's Word
Is it ok to use a kids Bible, or a Bible story book that paraphrases the stories, or must we read straight from the Bible?

I think both are good. And I think, again, both have Biblical precedent. When the Israelites crossed the Jordan they erected altars. They were told to so, so that when they passed by later with their children and the children's asked, "what are these?", they'd have the opportunity to tell them the story of God's deliverance. Not read it or recite it, tell it.

But certainly, we're commanded not only to read Scripture but hide it our hearts. Reading the word of God as God inspired it is incredibly important. I remember passages that I never memorized, but I've heard read over and over again. That is so important.

So tell the stories and read the Word. Do both.

5. Age appropriate vs. Challenging
It's hard, especially with several kids, to find the right balance here. What's appropriate for one is very challenging for another (or overly simplistic).  We probably lean towards the challenging. Sometimes the youngest may feel it's over his head. But, I've seen a few things happen repeatedly. One they ask questions, and conversations start that are priceless. Two, the older kids take on the role of tutor, and explain it in more simple terms. That's awesome! Three, the younger kids understand way more that I think they do. Four, months later, they'll recall something we discussed. They didn't get it at the time, but now the light bulb went on. Love it!

So we tend to the challenging, maybe not always age appropriate. But if that's all we did, it probably wouldn't work. Sometimes the conversations are more simple...and the older ones know it's not always all about them. Plus, who of us doesn't need to be reminded and dwell on the simple lessons from time to time?

We don't have all this figured out. We did. Then we had kids. My encouragement to you is to struggle through it. Find the time, make the mistakes, do your best. Find the appropriate balance in these areas and pour into your kids, showing them that the content of our faith really matters.

Christ Would be Lord of Your Emotions Too (Thoughts on Valentine's Day)

Emotions get a bad rap. I remember my dad saying things like "you can't trust your emotions." Now, I agree that you can't trust fallen emotions, but you can't trust fallen reason or the fallen will either.

But, Christ redeems us whole, not just reason, not just will, but emotions too.

And, Christ is Lord of it all. That means he commands us to think and believe, to will and to act, and to feel and emote.

I didn't realize this was controversial till I stepped in it [the proverbial 'it'] last week. Somewhere along the line, we drew a false distinction between joy and happiness, between love as an act and love as an emotion. I believe these are absolutely false distinctions.

Let me make a case briefly, using love as my example. No Christian can seriously question that we are called to love - to love God, to love neighbor, even to love our enemies. Sometimes this gets interpreted to mean that we ought to do loving things for the other, after all, love must be expressed in practical, real ways. It's not just a warm fuzzy emotion.

With this, I can partially agree. Love isn't just an emotion. It's more, but it's not less. Love must include affection.

Think about worship for a moment. What would worship be like without genuine feeling, without affection for the one we worship? Is God content to have us do loving things for him, like serve him out of duty, obey him, etc? No! We must feel something for God. We must feel love and serve and obey.  I think 1 Corinthians 13 makes this pretty clear.

13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing. (ESV)

Paul speaks of loving things - worship in tongues of men and angels, giving to the poor, surrendering to martyrdom. But if these aren't done in love, read 'with genuine affection/feeling', they are nothing!
This is true of our earthly relationships too. If my wife does loving things for me - buys me Valentine's Day candy, cooks dinner, keeps my clothes clean and ironed, even shows all kinds of physical affection - but feels nothing for me, is she a loving wife? No!  Emotions are important.

The same is true of joy and happiness. We've divided the two concepts when no such division is sustainable biblically (and doesn't show up in church writings until very recently).  Too often we've contended that you can be joyful, but not happy - in other words, joy isn't an emotion. But it is!  The Bible uses words that get translated 'joy' or 'happiness' as synonyms. True, biblical joy/happiness is deep and well rooted because it's grounded in the gospel and in God, but it's still an emotion. And it's true that it's possible to be joyful/happy and grieve and be sorrowful and mourn. They aren't mutually exclusive but that doesn't mean joy isn't an emotion. Joy is an emotion, call it happiness if you will, and it should touch our faces sometimes (in smiles).  You can't be glumly joyful!

So, I don't always feel happy or feel love. I''ll admit it (and it comes as no surprise to those who know me). Is that ok?  My answer is no. It's not. Something is wrong in my faith and obedience and I should repent, seek forgiveness. If I don't feel love for my wife, I should still show love, but pray fervently that God would fix my emotions and allow me to also feel love. If I'm not happy, I ought to ask God to make me happy - not the kind that depends on my circumstances or comfort, but deeply, biblically happy in Him!

Christ commands. He is Lord. The wind and the waves obey...so should my heart! 

For more on happiness and joy, look here at this article, and also this interview with Randy Alcorn. 

The Obedience of Faith

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh 4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, 5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, 6 including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ, 7 To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (ESV)

This morning I read Romans 1 as part of my devotional reading. One phrase from the above paragraph kept coming back to mind throughout the day - "the obedience of faith".  The NIV renders it as "the obedience that comes from faith". 

My first thought was personal. My faith, the beliefs in the truths of Scripture, my trust in Christ my King...all of this ought to lead to obedience. There is a malfunction in my faith if it isn't leading to obedience.

My second thought was church related. This was Paul's goal; it ought to be ours too. Not just acceptance of doctrines, not just faith by itself, but faith accompanied by works, trust and obedience. Not cheap grace and flimsy faith, but vital faith that produces the fruit of obedience.

Paul holds together two great doctrines we have driven a wedge between - justification and sanctification. They are different, but go together. Justification is by faith. So is sanctification. Justification precedes sanctification, but is never found all by itself.

These two doctrines go hand in hand because both are found in, and only in, union with Christ. It is by being united to Christ that we receive his righteousness and are declared 'saints' before God's bar. But, being united to Christ means his life flows through us and pushes itself out in good works, in love and in holiness. We can't be united to Christ for one, justification, and not the other.

Paul's ambition should be ours - obedience from faith for the sake of his name!

A Beauty Regimen for God's People

This fall I've been teaching on the topic of holiness in my ACG. I decided on this topic for two reasons. First, there was the desire to tackle something more practical than topics we've covered recently. Second, the connection between holiness and the church's (and believer's) witness is a strong one in both the Old and New Testaments. The holiness of God's people is to be attractive and beautiful, an adornment to the proclamation of the gospel.

This second theme is one that is counter-intuitive to many of us because when we think of holiness it doesn't seem all that at attractive or beautiful. In fact, when asked what images or thoughts come to mind when we think of holiness, the response was typically negative. That's not true when I asked about we think about God's being holy, but when asked to think of people who take holiness seriously, the images were stogie, prudish, unhappy, grumpy, etc.

This shouldn't be the case. Holiness is beautiful. Just look at Psalm 29:

      Ascribe to the LORD, you heavenly beings,
         ascribe to the LORD glory and strength.
       Ascribe to the LORD the glory due his name;
         worship the LORD in the splendor of his holiness.


There's an ambiguity in the last phrase above. It's unclear if the holiness referred to is God's holiness or if the psalmist is calling us to come and worship God clothed in holiness. Either way, the fact remains - holiness is deemed beautiful, splendid!  The same words come again in Psalm 96

      Worship the LORD in the splendor of his holiness;
         tremble before him, all the earth.

Think also of the scenes of heavenly worship we're given access to in Isaiah 6 or Revelation 4. The angelic beings sing 'Holy, holy, holy'. Yes, these words are definitely filled with a reverent awe. But it's more. It's also an appreciation of that which is supremely beautiful.

Here's an important bridge in my thought process. The holiness we as believers are called to ought to be beautiful since God's is. Theologians divide God's attributes into two categories: incommunicable attributes and communicable attributes. The incommunicable attributes are those which we, as creatures do not share, like eternality, like self-existence (aseity). God's communicable attributes are those which he shares with his creation - like love, patience, and holiness. There is a difference in how we are holy when compared to God. God is holy. We are made holy by God, by sharing in his holiness. So, if we're sharing in God's beautiful holiness, our's ought to be beautiful too.

Why don't we see holiness as beautiful? I think there's two key aspects of a full answer. First, those who speak much of holiness are often displaying a caricature of holiness - a version of holiness that is culturally conditioned and usually has a lot to do with lists of taboos (cards, drinking, dancing, movies, etc.). I once worked at a summer camp that was serious about holiness. I was handed a list of tshirts I had worn to work that were deemed inappropriate. It included a Petra shirt (yes, the classic Christian rock group) and a Levi's "Button your Fly"  shirt (remember those you children of the 80s/90s).  If that's what holiness is, it's not beautiful.

But the second reason is even more to blame I think. We don't see holiness as beautiful because our eyes are out of focus. They're clouded by the remnants of our sinful natures. They don't quite see as God sees; not yet.

So, I pray that God will put lenses on to teach me to see that holiness is indeed beautiful. To fight for holiness isn't just to fight against sin, the world, and the devil...it's to fight for BEAUTY!

I love these words from Edwards,  "holiness is a most beautiful, lovely thing. Men are apt to drink in strange notions of holiness from their childhood, as if it were a melancholy, morose, sour, and unpleasant thing; but there is nothing in it but what is sweet and ravishingly lovely. Tis the highest beauty and amiableness, vastly above all other beauties; tis a divine beauty, makes the soul heavenly and far purer than anything here on earth…”

God does it, but through means

This morning I was reading a section of 2 Corinthians. I love 2 Corinthians 5 and the section on 'the ministry of reconciliation'. And 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 got me thinking about the church and its relationship to Israel again.  But it was 2 Corinthians 7:6-7 that I saw in a fresh light.

Paul reminds us that God provides comfort to the downtrodden, downcast, and discouraged. That's a truth we hold dearly when we grieve, mourn, struggle with sadness. We pray often that God would comfort others in the midst of loss or sorrow.

But does God offer his comfort directly to the soul of the downcast? Certainly he can, but in 2 Corinthians 7 the comfort comes to Paul through another, namely Titus. Titus came to Paul, and this coming was comfort to Paul; in fact, he counted it as God's comfort. Moreover, the comfort Titus extended to Paul was, in part at least, the encouragement that he was loved by the church at Corinth.

The application is simple, but important. When we pray that God will comfort others, we should be ready to extend God's comfort to them. Speak of God's promises. Extend God's love and presence by our love and presence.

And this principles extends to so many areas. We pray that someone will come to faith in Christ, and while its possible that God will send an angel to proclaim the gospel directly to the person,  it is far more likely that God is calling us to be his mouthpiece to extend the outward gospel call to the person we pray for. Or, we pray that someone will see the error of their ways and come to make more wise decision; and it's likely God is calling us to speak truth in love. We pray that God will meet the financial needs of someone we are close to; and it's likely that God is calling us to be generous and be a part of God meeting that need.

That's what it means to be God's instruments, God's vessels, God's ministers...God's people.

The Precious Church

This morning I was reading though the first half of 1 Corinthians (part of my goal of reading through the NT each quarter of the year). I came across some notes I had scribbled in the margin of 1 Cor 5 some time ago on the nature of the church.

1 Corinthians 5 is Paul's instruction to the church regarding a sexually immoral member of the church - a man was boasting about having his father's wife!  Paul tells the church that the man is to "be removed from among you," that the church is to "deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved," and that they should not associate with the sexually immoral person (in the church, not the world). 

This chapter shows how precious the church is in three ways. First, the church as they body of Christ is so precious it is to be protected from defilement. Paul say that "a little leaven leavens the whole lump" just as a little immorality that is allowed to persist will pollute the whole body. The church was to protect itself from despoilment, much like one would want to protect a clean well. If the well gets polluted it is not longer useful and life-giving.

Second, the church is shown to be precious in that being put out of the church constitutes the greatest form of discipline. In the OT, the height of discipline in Israel was the death penalty. Excommunication is the NT equivalent in the New Israel, the church. In our house, electronics are precious and one of the greatest punishments we hand down is banishment from all screens.  We wouldn't take away, say, vegetables, because they aren't precious to our kids. The church banishes teh immoral brother from something that is important, something that ought to be precious. (Bizarre isn't it, how many self-excommunicate by neglecting the body and failing to participate in the life of the church). 

Third, the church is shown to be precious in that it is a safe haven from Satan. To kick someone out of the church is to remove them from the safe haven of the Kingdom's embassy and throw them out into the world, which is Satan's domain.

Do our attitudes towards the church reflect God's?

To Be Seen or Not To Be Seen

Yesterday I was reading through the Sermon on the Mount in my personal devotions. I'm sure I've noticed this before, but I was struck by two apparently conflicting statements and have been pondering how to reconcile them.

In Matthew 5:13-16 Jesus calls his followers to let their light shine before the watching world. In v. 16 Jesus commands his disciples to "let their light shine before other so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven."  This idea is repeated elsewhere in the NT (see 1 Peter 2:12 for example) Our good deeds are to be a witness and bring praise to God who has worked in us to will and to do good (Philippians 2:12-13).

Yet, later in the Sermon, Jesus warns his hearers not to do their good deeds "before other people in order to be seen by them" (Matt. 6:1).  Also, when we give to the needy, Jesus urges us to do it in secret, not letting our left hand know what our right hand is doing (Matt. 6:3).

Of course the difference between these two commands is one of motivation. In the first the person who does the good work and lets their light shine before others is doing so for the purpose of bringing God glory, not self. The second command is given to warn of the danger of self-glorification. This is clear from the context - the one who sounds trumpets to herald their charity is looking for the praise of men, and that will the their reward, their only reward. It's not tough to reconcile the two passages.

But...how do we tell the difference in our own lives and the lives of the church?  Motives are hard to discern, and I acknowledge the deceitfulness of my own heart.  So how do we know if we are doing a good deed for God's glory or for our own praise?

Enter the Holy Spirit. Pray we're sensitive to his promptings, conviction. Ask the Spirit to search the heart and reveal the motives. Without the indwelling Spirit, I don't think there'd be much hope of sorting out our motives (and of course, because we're still sinful our motives will always be a mixed bag). 

Disciples Casting Out Demons

I've run into a lot of weird stuff in ministry - including vampires! Yep.

One thing I haven't run into, at least to my knowledge, is clear cut demon possession - not of the kind that Jesus' disciples encountered when he sent them out.

Why?

I've always attributed it to the fact that we are not (I am not) as attune to the spiritual realities as the disciples were (and there's certainly something to that). I'm not saying it's correct, but we've come to rely on scientific/medical explanations for what may be demonic.  

Jonathan Edwards raises another possibility in a sermon from 1736. It's a sermon he preached for a young pastors ordination based on the passage in Luke 10:17-18, "17 The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!” 18 And he said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven."

In his explanation of the passage (Puritan sermons were often broken into three parts: Explanation, Doctrine, and Uses or Application) Edwards comments, "In those days when Christ was on the earth, there were multitudes in the land possessed with devils, which seems to have been so ordered to prepare the way for a glorious triumph of Christ over the powers of darkness in casting them out."

When you look at the Old Testament you see no clear examples of demonic possession. The troubling spirit sent to assault Saul may be the lone exception (1 Sam 16:14). During the intertestamental period we do have accounts of Jewish exorcists, especially from within the Essenes sect and also in other pagan religions. Then, all of the sudden, a flurry of activity around Jesus' ministry, continuing on to some degree in the early stages of the church (though not with nearly the frequency in Acts as you see in the gospels).

Edwards point makes sense to me on two levels. First, Satan knew of the coming Messiah and his attacks and activity were intensified in the period around Jesus' coming. Second, this was according to God's plan so that Christ might display his power and the inbreaking of the kingdom in awe inspiring ways. Standing there watching possessed pigs run off a cliff you couldn't miss a) demons destroy,  b) they fear Jesus, and c) he could destroy them any time he wants. 

Conquering King indeed!

Means of Grace in the Church

Some ideas are challenging because they are difficult and new. Sometimes ideas are challenging because they have been poorly communicated. On Sunday I made an idea that was challenging because it's new to many more difficult because I poorly communicated it. Usually I don't go back and reexplain myself here on my blog, but I didn't have time to clear it up in the ACG I was teaching and I don't want to leave it un-addressed.

In the ACG I was teaching on the Lord's Supper as a sacrament and introduced the notion that the Supper is a means of grace for the believer. Several were uncomfortable with this phrase because, as they understood it, it seems to suggest that if you do these things, God will give you grace. A friend challenged, "It sound like you're saying 'If you obey, you get more grace'?" And I affirmed that's what I meant - you come to the Lord's table, partake as you are commanded to do, and you receive grace. That didn't sit well in the class, and later, as I reflected on it, I think I understand why.

As I explained it, I may have made it sound like our obedience earns grace. That isn't at all what I meant. In fact, earned grace is an impossibility, it's a contradiction in terms. You can not earn a free gift. If it's earned, it ceases to be free. But, being a free gift doesn't mean that you don't have to do something to access it. If I call to my children and say, "Come down boys, its Christmas! Come get your gifts!", the boys have to do something to get their gifts (get out of bed and come to the tree downstairs. Yet I don't think anyone would say that this takes away from the free nature of the gift - the boys certainly didn't earn it. Or, if I call them to dinner it doesn't mean that I've set up a works based system - you must obey or you don't eat. I'm simply inviting them to where the food is.

That seems to me a pretty good analogy (patting myself on the back a little) for what happens at the Supper. The Supper is a spiritual feast. Our souls are fed as we partake of the body and the blood of Christ. We truly receive grace in this feast - grace that sustains us, helps us persevere, helps us grow in Christ-likeness. We must heed the summons to come to the feast, to come and receive the gift. We don't earn the gift or the banquet, but we come obediently and expectantly ready to receive.

A few more quick points may clarify even more.

First, we don't just need grace once. We need it constantly. You could draw the distinction, maybe, between saving grace (justifying) and sanctifying grace, but I don't know that's necessary or wise. It's all saving grace. Remember: we've been saved, are being saved, and will be saved. Salvation isn't just justification, it includes our sanctification and our glorification in eternity also - all in union with Christ!

Second, while grace can (and certainly does) come to the sinner in surprising and unique ways, it more typically comes through God ordained means. At the individual level, these include the reading of the Word, prayer, the ministry of fellow believers. But there is a special role for the church. Berkhoff writes, "While the Spirit can and does in some respects operate immediately on the soul of the sinner, He has seen fit to bind Himself largely to the use of certain means in the communication of divine grace...The Church may be represented as the great means of grace which Christ, working through the Holy Spirit, uses for the gathering of the elect, the edification of the saints, and the building up of His spiritual body. He qualifies her for this great task by endowing her with all kinds of spiritual gifts, and by the institution of the offices for the administration of the Word and sacraments, which are all means to lead the elect to their eternal destiny." - Louis Berkhoff, Systematic Theology , 604.

Third, I think its always good to remember that our obedience isn't something that earns grace because it's grace based obedience. In other words,"it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13). Every act of obedience draws on God's grace, so rather than earning something from God by our obedience, we go deeper in dept to God's grace as we obey. Amazing Grace indeed! If you want to think more on this, I highly recommend John Piper's Future Grace: The Purifying Power of the Promises of God (you can hear his speak on it it here).

"Pray for You," Jaron and the Long Road to Love

Well, glad that's over. My foray into country music lasted 24hrs, which is about 25hrs too long. I did stumble upon this very amusing song though, and it got me to a thinkin about all those imprecatory psalms you read by David and others. Before I offer some thoughts, listen and laugh.



Jaron's prayer is tame compared to the psalmists. Consider Psalms 139:19–22,

O that You would slay the wicked, O God; Depart from me, therefore, men of bloodshed. For they speak against You wickedly, And Your enemies take Your name in vain. Do I not hate those who hate You, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? I hate them with the utmost hatred; They have become my enemies.

Or again, Psalm 69: 22-28,

Let their table before them become a snare; And when they are in peace, let it become a trap. Let their eyes be darkened, so that they cannot see; And make their loins continually to shake. Pour out thine indignation upon them, And let the fierceness of thine anger overtake them. Let their habitation be desolate; Let none dwell in their tents. For they persecute him whom thou hast smitten; And they tell of the sorrow of those whom thou hast wounded. Add iniquity unto their iniquity; And let them not come into thy righteousness. Let them be blotted out of the book of life, And not be written with the righteous.

Squirming yet? One more then. Psalm 109:6-15,

Appoint a wicked man against him; let an accuser stand at his right hand. When he is tried, let him come forth guilty; let his prayer be counted as sin! May his days be few; may another take his office! May his children be fatherless and his wife a widow! May his children wander about and beg, seeking food far from the ruins they inhabit! May the creditor seize all that he has; may strangers plunder the fruits of his toil! Let there be none to extend kindness to him, nor any to pity his fatherless children! May his posterity be cut off; may his name be blotted out in the second generation! May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered before the Lord, and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out! Let them be before the Lord continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth!

Bitter much?

Some look at these and believe they are below the dignity of Christian Scripture, that they conflict with the ethic of the rest of the Bible, especially as taught and modeled by Jesus. But do they? What are we to make of these. Without much elaboration, here's a few points to consider.

1. Some have tried to explain these passages using the prescriptive vs. descriptive distinction. In other words, the psalmist is describing truthfully what lies in his hears, and it ain't pretty. This is a long way from saying the Bible condones such attitudes, let alone commands or prescribes them. However, I don't think this is an adequate approach. For one, we are never given any indication of God's disapproval of such prayers. (BTW, you see such imprecations in the New Testament as well, though not as frequent. Consider what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 16:22, "If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed." Look also at Luke 10:10-16; Gal 1:8; 5:12; 2 Thess 1:6-10; 2 Tim 4:14; Rev 6:10; 19:1-2). Harry Mennega has pointed out that "the New Testament appears not in the least embarrassed with the Old Testament imprecations; on the contrary, it quotes freely from them as authoritative statements with which to support an argument. The New Testament not only quotes passages which, though themselves not imprecations, are found in a Psalm with an imprecatory section; but also, and this is more remarkable, it quotes with approval the imprecations themselves."

2. Also, I'm sure most of us have prayed, without realizing it maybe, such imprecations. Oh, we're not as detailed, but we pray "Maranatha, Come Lord Jesus." We pray, "Let your kingdom come, let y our will be done."  It seems abundantly clear from Scripture that the return of Jesus and the final establishment of the kingdom will mean judgment for untold millions. And we pray for it (and we should).

3. John Piper urges us to "Consider that, in some of these psalms, love for the enemy has been pursued for a long time. 'They requite me evil for good. . . . When they were sick, I wore sackcloth' (Ps. 35:12-13). 'In return for my love they accuse me, even as I make prayer for them. So they reward me evil for good, and hatred for my love' (Ps. 109:4-5)."

4. Sam Storms offers this good observation, "These prayers are not expressions of personal vengeance. In fact, most imprecations are in psalms written by David, perhaps the least vengeful man in the OT (consider his dealings with Saul, Nabal, Absalom, Shimei, etc.; see especially 2 Sam. 24:12). David never asks that he be allowed to “get even” with or “pay back” his enemies. His prayer is that God would act justly in dealing with transgressors. There is a vast difference between vindication and vindictiveness. David’s passion was for the triumph of divine justice, not the satisfaction of personal malice. The OT was as much opposed to seeking personal vengeance against one's personal enemies as is the NT (see Exod. 23:4-5; Lev. 19:17-18)." In essence, the impreccatory prayers are good examples of giving over to God injustice and asking him to judge, to make right. It's David's (or others) refusing to pursue revenge, acknowledging "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord" (Romans 12:9. I just went all King James).

5. Moreover, we ought to recognize that these impreccatory psalms are simply claiming the promises of God. He has promised to fight for his people, to do justice, to punish the wicked, etc. This is simply asking God to do what he has promised to do.

6. Lastly, the impreccatory psalms express moral repugnance at sin and evil, not simply personal dislike of a person (in fact, rarely are the impreccatory psalms offered against a specific person, but a class of people, i.e. "those who hate the Lord", "the wicked", etc.). Ultimately, the motivation is the vindication of God's righteousness and glory, not personal revenge.

Now, my caveat. I don't trust myself to sort out my self-centered, unholy motives from my noble, holy ones. So, I won't pray impreccatory psalms over specific people. But, the broad categories are appropriate, even if I'm praying in the same prayer, "Father, forgive them and bring them to the grace of repentance."

In case you want to read more imprecations, here's a more full list: Pss. 5:10; 6:10; 7:6; 9:19-20; 10:2,15; 17:13; 28:4; 31:17-18; 35:1,4-8,19,24-26; 40:14-15; 41:10; 54:5; 55:9,15; 56:7; 58:6-10; 59:5,11-14; 63:9-10; 68:1-2; 69:22-28; 70:2-3; 71:13; 79:6,10-12; 83:9-18 (cf. Judges 4:15-21; 5:25-27); Pss. 94:1-4; 97:7; 104:35; 109:6-19,29; 119:84; 129:5-7; 137:7-9; 139:19-22; 140:8-11; 141:10; 143:12.

Jesus, Restore my Simplicity

This week I'm praying a new prayer for myself - "Jesus, restore my simplicity." It's not a prayer about being to materialistic (though I'm sure I am) or too busy (I know I am). No, this is a prayer about my faith. Restore the child-likeness of my faith, restore the ability to be amazed without analyzing.

That's been a struggle for me of late. I remember sitting in an advanced hermeneutics class with Dr. Hans Bayer at Covenant and he said something like, "I feel sorry for you all. Now, after having taken this class, you won't ever be able to just sit with the word and enjoy it without thinking about the nuances of this class coming to play." I've heard professors of preaching say similar things in their classes. And, it's true.

This week I'm preparing for the two classes I'll be teaching - I'm reading in things like myth and ancient cosmologies. I'm reading on the flexibility of language and the impossibility of being precise (and what that means for inerrancy). I'm reading on one of my favorite topics - the Lord's Supper. But it's technical reading. What do we mean by real presence? Is it corporal or spiritual? What's the relationship between the sign and the thing signified? Etc?

I really enjoy these things. Deeply enjoy them. And I think their incredibly important.

But.

This morning my devotional reading was from Mark 10. Two pericopes stood out:

Mark 10:13, And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them, and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. 15 Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” 16 And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands on them. (ESV)

And then, following close on the heels of this passage, comes the story of blind Bartimaeus:

Mark 10:50, And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart. Get up; he is calling you.” 50 And throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. 51 And Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” And the blind man said to him, “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.” 52 And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way. (ESV)

So, my reasoning is as follows: Jesus appreciates the faith of children - humble, believing, without pretense. This isn't at all to say that he doesn't also appreciate deep, intellectual, thoughtful faith (I think both are needed). And, if Jesus wants this in us, and we want it, he's more than capable of granting it. After all, he restored the sight of a blind mind (and brings dead people to life and turns hearts of stone back into flesh, and...). So, I'm praying, restore my simplicity. Not, take away my intellect or my desire to think critically. But, with that, add simplicity.

Two Very Different 'O Come' Songs

Take a moment and listen to these two wonderful Christmas songs.

David Crowder Band, "O Come O Come Emmanuel"



Justin McRoberts, "Come all ye Faithful" (you're lucky, I almost posted the Stryper version of his carol!)



These two songs were a part of the last Connexion of the fall semester when Bob preached the sermon "Merry Christmas from the Old Testament".  We actually sang these two songs back to back, 'O Come O Come Emmanuel' first, then "Come All Ye Faithful".  The band sounded absolutely fantastic - I was overwhelmed, especially during 'O Come O Come Emmanuel'.

But something hit me as we sang these two songs back to back - the tone of these two songs is so different. I don't just mean musically, but lyrically as well. The first, while certainly speaking of rejoicing, set's it in the context of mourning and exile, of gloom and 'death's dark shadow'.  The second speaks of choirs of angels, of exultation and of the 'happy morning'.  What hit me is that both are true now of the church - mourning and exile, joy and exultation.

No one makes more clear our status as exiles in this world than Peter. Three times, at least, in his short epistle he uses the word exile or exiles (1Peter 1:1, 17 and 2:11). Peter highlights that this is a time of suffering and trial, and who among us doesn't fee this.

But, the truths of 'O Come all Ye Faithful' should not be ignored either. Maybe Paul emphasizes joy more than Peter (though Peter does say in 1 Peter 1:8 that believers, even in the midst of their suffering, 'rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory'). Paul though wrote the letter to the Philippians that has become known as 'The Epistle of Joy'.  This epistle, however, was written from jail as Paul was suffering for his faith!

The mourning and gloom of 'O Come O Come Emmanuel' is a reality for the church until the second advent of Christ. The joy and exultation of 'O Come All Ye Faithful' is a reality for the church because of Christ's first advent. We live between the two, between the climax of history and the end of history. We need to hold to both truths or our message will be misshapen and not reflect the full reality of who we are as the body of Christ.

Piper's Wrong

Earlier today (11/17/12) John Piper, a theologian/pastor I respect immensely, tweeted: "If you're not living by the joy of the Holy Spirit the only category you have for spiritual disciplines is legalism." I think Piper is wrong on this.

I don't make a habit of calling out pastor's/theologians when I disagree with them. And let me say again, John Piper is someone I have tremendous admiration for. He, maybe more than any other contemporary writer, has shaped my theology and understanding of the Christian life. I read Desiring God: Meditations of a Christian Hedonist right out of seminary. I've never been the same since. I know I've drifted away from his influence some over the years as I've read more confessional writers, and this may or may not be good.

So, I'm calling out a man I respect greatly, and I don't do it lightly.

Why?

Because I think his tweet is highly discouraging for many believers who aren't being legalistic in their use of the disciplines but don't experience they joy they long for. I'm positive that's not what Piper is aiming to do, and certainly a tweet isn't a good tool for offering subtlety or nuance. But, I know I'm not alone in the fact that I often lack the joy that I desire - the joy I know is glorifying to God. Should I (or you, if you're in the same boat) stop singing songs of worship till we feel the joy? Should we stay off our knees till the joy of the Lord drives us to them? Should we cease reading the Bible out of fear that we're simply doing it out of a sense of obligation - that legalism is wrapping it's tentacles around our heart and squeezing the life and joy out of it?

NO!

I remember preaching a sermon on this topic several years ago when I was going through it. Ministry was discouraging. My joy was slipping away from me. My advice? In the desert 'Joyless', keep going back to the places you know you'll find the waters of joy. Spend even more time reading in faith trusting that the Bible opens up God's heart to you. God reveals himself in those pages. He is the source of joy. Read and get to know God better. Dig. Dig. And pray. Pray the Spirit will guide you to joy. Pray he'll open your eyes to what is right there before you! Meditate. Worship. Go to church, for in the presence of God's people, maybe God will remind you of your'e glorious destination and kindle the joy again (kinda like the psalmist in Psalm 73).

So brother Piper, I love you, but you're wrong. Please be more tender to us bruised reeds in the future.

Jonah Study #2: A Revealing Roll of the Die

In the first study of Jonah we were introduced to a prophet who was willing to proclaim God's blessings on Israel but not on the pagan Nineveh. Having received his call to go east to the capital of the Assyrian empire, Jonah runs west instead.

This second study looks at Jonah 1:4-17. These verses record God's pursuit of Jonah, the sailors response to the storm, the questioning of Jonah, Jonah's answer, the sailor's reluctance to jettison Jonah, and Jonah's experience as flotsam in the sea.

I think the best place to start is by focusing on what we see of God's character revealed in these verses. First, you see God's omnipotence/sovereignty. You see his is sovereign over nature: he sends a storm to do his bidding and then calms it again, he beckons a great fish and the fish obeys. Moreover, he's omnipotent over the casting of the lot - it falls to Jonah, not by chance but because God wanted Jonah found out. Second, you see something of God's persistence. He is the Hound of Heaven  - Jonah can't escape his call (notice how closely the captains words resemble God's!). Third, you also see that God is not a petty local deity. He is, as Jonah declares ,"the God of heaven, who made sea and dry land."  Moreover, he's not an ethnocentric God. While Israel is God's chosen people, they are chosen for the purpose of blessing all the nations of the earth. Here we see that this will happen whether Israel, as represented by Jonah, is a willing participant or not. Already we've seen God's concern for the people of Nineveh. Here we see that Jonah unwittingly testifies to God and turn pagan sailors into YHWH worshipers! God's grace to these sailors comes from a rebellious prophet. Gotta chuckle at that. Lastly, you see God's grace. Rebellious Jonah isn't left to drown. God rescues him with a big fish.

It's interesting to compare all the characters in these verses. If you do, you see everyone gets it except Jonah. The wind hears and obeys. So does the fish. Even the boat realized the danger - the language is literally 'the boat thought is was going to break up'. The pagan sailors hear of God and respond with fear and worship. But Jonah, Jonah shows no signs of repentance. No real fear of the Lord. He doesn't get it, he persists in his disobedience.

Jonah's  persistent rebellion is stunning, especially in light of his declaration that God is the one who created the sea. The sailors had to be thinking, "And you thought you could run away from this God. What kind of idiot are you?"  But, then again, I'm that kind of idiot a lot. I say one thing, think I really believe it, but betray my lack of belief with actions that don't line up. There a little does of Jonah in all of us.

I may be reading a little bit too much into the story, but I really don't like Jonah. He knows he's the problem, the one who's put the ship and all the sailors in danger. Have you ever wondered why he said the sailors needed to throw him overboard? Why didn't he just jump? I think the sailors were a little suspicious. Is God going to hold us accountable for killing one of his prophets? Why don't you just jump? Are you trying to take us down with you? That's why they pray, 'don't let his blood be on our hands God'. I believe Jonah's intentions were far less than noble.

I think we need to remember that this story was written either in the years preceding Israel's subjugation by Assyria or during the period of their exile. What was God trying to communicate to his people living either in fear of Assyria or in exile in Assyria? How were they to respond to this?

I think in part, this was meant to serve as a partial explanation for their exile. They had been called, as God's people, to participate in God's mission - a redemptive mission that was cosmic in scope, not limited to the people living within the borders of Israel. They were to be a light to the nations. They failed at this. They hadn't kept themselves pure and they had begun to look like every other nation around them. This is God's way of reminding them of his mission and their failure to line up with it. It was a failure God was punishing and using the Assyrians as his instrument.

What about for us living on this side of the cross? Well, Israel's failure helps us understand we needed a better Israel - the true Israel who would keep covenant and be entirely on board with God's redemptive mission. Jesus is that - he is the True Israel. And, all who are 'in Christ' are a part of this True Israel. Like the Israel of the Old Testament, we have a role to play in God's mission. Jonah is a reminder to take that calling seriously and not to begrudge God's grace given to the outsider. It's a reminder that God is still sovereign and when he says 'Go!', we ought to be willing servants - anitJonah's.

Next study...Jonah in the fish. Gross. 

"Strong Enough," by Apocalyptica

"Strong Enough", by Apocalyptica featuring Brent Smith on 7th Symphony

Cellos and heavy metal? Yep, that's Apocalyptica . At first, many thought Apocalyptica was meant to be a parody of metal music. But, well, they rock - and they've got some great singers to sing with them, especially on the last album 7th Symphony. On this track, Brent Smith from Shinedown - another of my favorite hard rock groups, lends his vocals to the band.

There a lot to comment on regarding these song lyrics - several themes that strike me as very true.

First,  this song reminds me of the important admonition from Proverbs 4:23, "Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life" (ESV).  The word 'keep' here is much stronger than it sounds and has been translated in other versions 'guard' or 'protect'. It is counsel my dad offered nearly weekly, especially as I entered into the those teen years and began allowing my heart to be romantically involved with girls. Protect your heart. Don't let yourself get to the place where you sing, "There's nothing I can do, My heart is chained to you, And I can't get free, Look what this love's done to me." That doesn't mean we should protect our hearts from getting hurt, but protect our loves from getting improperly ordered - of allowing a human relationship to the thing that most enthralls us and captivates us.

Second, this relationship described in this song is a mixture "between pleasure and the pain" and leaves the singer with a choice - stay through the pain to find the pleasure, or leave the pain behind and forfeit the pleasure. I think that's true of ever relationship. The more intimate the relationship, the more pain will have to be endured. No one has hurt me more deeply than Lynn, and I know I've wounded her more deeply than any one else. We're not proud of that, and we've sought forgiveness from each other, but I doubt we're done hurting each other. We're still sinners who sin against the ones we love. At the same time, however, I've never had more joy and delight in a relationship. This isn't the way it was supposed to be, but is a testimony to the fall and how the curse effects everthing (see especially Gen 3:16).

Third, this song speaks of the dis-integrity of our beings in the fallen state. The word integrity comes from the same Latin root as integer and implies a wholeness of person. The main word used for integrity in the Hebrew Bible is tom. Interestingly, it can mean simplicity also. The ideas overlap significantly - a heart of integrity is one in where all the intentions of the heart are moving in the same direction. A man of integrity doesn't compartmentalize his private and public lives, his heart and his actions, etc. He is simple. His heart is simple as God is simple, meaning not divided, not double-minded (see James 1:7-8). This song shows a person deeply divided, a person who is not whole - "I know it's wrong and I know it's right. Even if I try to win the fight, my heart would overrule my mind."  We are all, this side of Christ's return, fractured in our loyalties, divided between serving God wholeheartedly (simply and with integrity) and serving self. The Spirit, as he does his sanctifying work restores the image of God in us, bringing us back to that place of wholeness and integrity. We've got a long way to go, but we can pray with the Psalmist, "Teach me your way, O LORD, that I may walk in your truth; unite my heart to fear your name" (Ps 86:11, ESV). Ultimately, this songs testimony to mans disintegration points us ahead to the eschaton when all things are made right the the fracturing effects of sin are undone.

Like so many songs, these lyrics give us great insight into the human heart apart from God - enslaved, fractured, hurting. Thank God that in Christ, "Everything sad is going to come untrue" (Sam Gamgee, Lord of the Rings, with some liberty).

Fantasy Kills Imagination (and Hurts the Church)

Last week I read a great post from Donald Miller, How Fantasy is Killing Your Imagination.  It was a convicting piece, forcing me to ponder what kinds of dreams I indulge.

Miller writes,

I’m capable of living almost exclusively in my mind. I can walk and daydream for hours. But some of these daydreams haven’t proved helpful. And the ones that aren’t helpful are daydreams about my own glory.

C.S. Lewis delineated between the two in his book “Surprised by Joy.” In the book, he talks about his early days imagining “Animal Land” which was a world he made up with his older brother. The time he spent imagining Animal Land, he noted, was great practice for becoming a writer. But fantasies about his own glory, he noted, (he would often spend time fantasizing about being a good dancer) was only practice for becoming a fool.

When it comes to the church, I have dreams. Some are great ones - dreams of the church changing the town  I live in through service, dreams of the college ministry making a significant impact on the darkness surrounding the campus, dreams of revival, of lives changed. I can sit in prayer over these dreams and be brought to tears. They are good dreams. But, they're not the only daydreams I have. Too often I catch myself practicing to be a fool - imagining its my sermon that sparks the revival and my name gets spoken generations from now in the same sentences as Edward or Whitfield. I dream that a book I want to write will become a classic (with dust-jacket blurbs written by the 'big guns' in the Reformed academic community).  These self-focused daydreams may get in the way of the bigger dreams, or at least render me unfit servant for their accomplishment.

I remember hearing years ago that as we mature, we move from focusing solely on what we do (behavior/goals) to how we do it (means) to why we do it (motives).  I'm praying that God will truly expose self-serving motives. I doubt I'll be able to set them aside entirely - not this side of Christ's return. I will pray, however, that God will use me despite my being a bag of mixed up motives and self-centered imaginings.

So, where does your mind run as you daydream?