On Reformed Theology and Mysticism…

I am reformed…a lot.  I think that followers of Christ have a responsibility to intellectually pursue God through His word and in doing so the result should be an awesome knowledge of His sovereignty and grace.  I love to study and I love to teach, but my problem is that sometimes what I learn in study comes close to being purely academic. 

I can distinctly remember some of my early growth after surrendering to the call to ministry being very experiential.  Never chariasmatic, just much more emotional.  I also had a touch of an admiration for eastern culture, so that bled in a touch.  A strange shift happened, however, when I began to realize the truth of Reformation doctrine and the necessity of deep and passionate study in God’s word, the emotion began to wain.  Now, I realize that God does not always utilize emotions and “fuzzies,” but there has to be a middle ground.

To study of God’s love and grace and grasp the magnitude of regeneration should be a mystifying experience.  How can I know and understand that an infinite God would sacrifice Himself for an unworthy creation to regain the ability for fellowship with Him and not be brought to desperate emotion?  There is something distinctly mystical in monergistic regeneration, that my transformation had nothing to do with me.  That my will was set free by events that I had no control over.  Reformed doctrine is filled with supernatural intervention that defies human understanding.  The reformers knew this as did Augustine and the church fathers.  There has to be a balance…knowing God intimately and intellectually and embracing the wonders that we cannot understand with passion and emotion.

Scared to Death…Christians and Politics

It’s election season and time for all good evangelical Christians to go out of their mind with fear and fervor.  I’ve noticed that when election time rolls around the sovereignty of God takes a backseat to the democratic process.  Pastors and lay people alike fill their yards with signs for the most evangelical friendly candidate and preach about the dangers of the democrats with a lot of references from Revelation and the Olivet Discourse in the process.  Now, please know that I write this not as a push for one political party over the other.  I am about as “apolitical” as one can get and if it came down to it I am a touch right of center in my views on the economy and the role of the federal government in the private lives of the citizens.  Instead, I believe that as Christians we are forgetting who is in control of those running for president or any office and fear that if a particular man (or woman) takes the office that somehow America will slip beyond the grip of God.

With exception of a small period of time, the Bible is full of examples of God’s people living under ungodly rulers.  Joseph was in Egypt, Daniel in Babylon and Persia, Christ and the early church under Rome, etc.  What is shocking about this is that not only are these people ruling over God’s people, but God Himself allowed and even ordained these evil kingdoms to fulfill His purpose.  The book of Daniel clearly teaches that Yahweh is the King of kings, all kings, even the kings that live in a way that is blasphemous in His sight.  Not only does He have dominion over them, but He utilizes them for His divine will and purpose. 

So what does that mean for modern followers of God today?  How should we react if someone comes to power who seemingly embodies everything that the Gospel cries out against? 

We should serve them passionately.  1 Peter tells us to follow every human institution, even those that do not honor God.  When Daniel lived under the rule of Babylon and Persia, he was a model citizen and high ranking advisor.  He followed the law and communed with kings.  Daniel served the very people that oppressed his people with undying resolve because he trusted the sovereignty of His God over the actions of these men.  And when those institutions came in conflict with his faith, he continued to trust in God and remained faithful and faced his consequences with a quiet passion.  We have a calling to serve those that God has allowed and ordained to be in authority over us no matter who they are.  However, if that institution calls us to forsake the Gospel we should not seek to overthrow or run, but be ready to remain faithful and suffer whatever may come for the sake of the Gospel and the Gospel alone.

I hope this was not completely incomprehensible.  I’m a touch scattered and tired tonight, but I think the main message is there.  Peace and God Bless
                        Chris

Mixing Jesus and Porn to Move a Little Merch

By now the xxx church has gained a great deal of attention and coverage, so I won’t go into great detail on what they do.  The “ministry” has become a favorite of the large percentage of young rebelious cats who are desperate for church that doesn’t look like church and things that shock the o.g.’s of the evangelical church.  The purpose of the group, in general terms, is to be a support system and means of awareness about pornography and the implications that go along with it.  Sounds like a good idea right?  Unfortunately so did communism.  Am I trying to make the pornies look like commies, hardly, merely to point out some ways that the well intentioned group has lost a bit of touch with Biblical reality.

To begin with, on their website you can see a series of promotional videos that they utilize to promote their cause.  Among these are videos of a man in a rabbit suit at a porn convention, a video declaring that “every time you masturbate, God kills a kitten”, and a puppet running a porn talk show.  While these techniques are great to encourage children to brush their teeth or to show the ill effects of too much sugar on your teeth, it seems to make light of a subject that the group swears up and down is a serious problem.  Maybe I’m a bit uptight, but I find it hard to take a sin that holds so many men and women captive and make it in to a cheap joke and marketing stunt.  Last time I checked, God seems to have a much more grave view of sin than killing kittens for a good giggle.   I could rant on these things for a while longer, but I should probably move on.

In the section under “Jesus Loves Porn Stars” they again start off in the right direction by recognizing that God can and does save men and women out of the most dire of situations, they soon show their lack of theology farther along in the paragraph.  In the description of this particular program, they make the statement that “He [God] is not angry with us.”  Perhaps I have completely interpreted Scripture, history and the human condition completely wrong, but I seem to remember hearing that God has had a reputation of being angered to great extents because of man’s sin.  “But Chris, doesn’t God love the sinner and hate the sin???”  Absolutely NOT!  Now, it must be kept in mind that I do have a fairly reformed view of Scripture and see quite an emphasis on human depravity, but it seems to me that the sinner and the sin are one in the same unless Christ has sanctified the sinner.  In fact, from the best I can tell, man is born SINFUL and is in essence sin…soooo God is angry with us when we sin because sin is rebellion against the Holy God.    How dare we make light of sin or speak on God’s behalf. 

The group places a high emphasis on ministering to and evangelizing men and women in the porn industry, which is a blessing and an admirable task.  However, as is usually the case, they ended up swinging from the hyper-conservative ostrasizing of these people to becoming emmersed in the culture in order to reach them; both are equally wrong.  While we have no right to question or decide who God will save and who we are to reach out to, we must also show decernment in the way that we go about fulfilling that call.  Evangelizing in a bar is one thing, you can be there and not drink.  Ministry in a place like a porn convention is quite different in that there is no way to avoid taking in what is going on around you. 

I could list many other ways in which the xxx chuch has come up short, but I will end here.  The greatest problem with the seeker-submissive (sensitive, whatever you wish to call it) is that they have time and time again bent Scripture and sacrificed theology in order to fulfill their purpose.  God does not need our help, but allows us to take part in His purpose.  We have no need to make His word and purpose “more relevant” or “more shocking,” He can do that on His own.  We are simply here to live in a way that glorifies Him and minister to others in the way Scripture ordains so that men and women may come to know Him and He may be glorified.

Theology is the Heart of Ministry

One of the key themes that is running through mainline churches is the abandonment of deep theological teaching in order to do more “ministry.”  The aspect of teaching hard doctrine and theological truth is sometimes seen as mundane and unnecessary and even a hinderance to ministry at times.  I would submit that quite the opposite is true and that ministry is able to be performed at it’s greatest level when solid theology is put into practice.

Theology is the study of God and His character as well as how He interacts with His creation.  Scripture is very clear that everything that we learn and do that is righteous comes directly from God.  Ultimately, we cannot love, let alone minister without some base knowledge of God and Him teaching us how to do so.  So it would seem quite apparent that if we learn to minister and love by knowing God, in order to minister better we should know Him better.  In order to properly fulfill the mission we have been given, there has to be a recommitment and devotion to studying and understanding the God that we serve.  I will end this hear as a short and simple post. 

Alistair McGrath and Carrying the Torch of Bad Theology…

Lately I have been watching and listening to a number of interviews and debates with Alistair McGrath, former atheist and now Christian apologist.  During a couple, namely his appearance on a talk show (The Hour) and a debate with Richard Dawkins that was cut from Dawkins documentary, McGrath comes off looking bad at best.  In a great deal of circles, McGrath is considered a top authority on apologetics and debates on a very public and very constant level.  Part of this appeal comes from, I’m sure, what Dawkins calls McGrath’s “street cred” of being a former atheist.  Regardless, his arguments fail greatly in light of his hype.

The biggest problem is the constant inconsitancy in McGrath’s theology as a whole.  At times he appears close to being a Deist, and at others he gives answers that are almost fanciful and void of reason all together.  For starters, he readily presents himself as a theistic evolutionist, which does not bring complete inconsistancy in itself (although comes pretty close), but he never completely reconciles how he can believe in a uncreatable Creator and an evolutionary mindset.  Also, and more notalby, Dawkins poses a question about God’s provision for a child in the midst of a tragic earthquake that killed thousands, in which the parents thanked God for saving her.  Dawkins could not understand why God would save the girl and kill the masses, and McGrath could not help him gain any headway.  While there are strong theological answers that would have been quite sufficient (which I will not go into for the sake of time), McGrath gave an answer that was actually less convincing than the overused “faith” card.  On one hand He said that God set into motion the world and allows it to run without intervention, thus by that argument the child just got lucky.  Then, however, he claimed that he believed that God really did intervene and save the child, but gave no reconciliation between the two. 

Perhaps the most startling of his inconsistant argument dealt with the atonement of Christ and penal substitution.  Dawkins stated that he could not understand why the all powerful God had to die in order to forgive sins and could not merely absolve sins with a word.  McGrath the procedes to dive down into a C.S. Lewis-esq proposal about how the crucifixion’s main purpose was to be an example of Christ’s love and a symbolic gesture at best, thus eliminating a great portion of the Biblical concept of atonement. 

Ultimately throughout the entire interview and debate, nothing was said…on either part.  Even a man who claims that Christianity can be backed by evidence was able to give none in the face of ”tough” questions.  I have to believe that there is a switch in our brains that turns off when presented with debates that challenge our faith.  In reality, Christianity is a completely rational and reasonable faith and it is painful that the vast percentage of those who debate and defend our faith happen to be unrational and disconnected.  God works through history and science and upon careful study it can clearly be noted that both are rationalized in and through one another.  Atheists are scared of God and Christians are scared of reason, but the fact is that God is quite reasonable and presented His creation with ample evidence by which He and His work of Creation and redemption can to a greater extent than we believe, be explained and understood. 

Pick Up The Sword or Put Down The Signs…

The idea of non-violent protest is ridiculous.  Throughout history, especially in this country, nonviolent protest has been the medium of choice for those who wish to change what they believe to be injustice.  Activists of all sorts; be it environmentalists, gay rights activists, pro life advocates, civil rights activists, hippies, Christians, etc, have all desperately sought to seek changes in their favor in a nonviolent, passively insubordinate way.  But to what avail? 

I would venture to say that nonviolent protest, without violent intervention has been all but useless.  Dr. King needed X and the Panthers.  The only protests we remember ended in a massacre or explosion.  It seems very clear to me that, if you want to get something accomplished through protest, the quickest and most effective way is to take up arms and take what you want.  A whisper in the ear will not get nearly the attention as a shot to the head…right?  If you ask me, nonviolent protest is a cop out, the weapon of choice for people who want change things but not willing to get their hands dirty and are more than willing to end with a good try and we’ll get em next time.  And for the record, I’m not calling Dr. King a quitter by any means, but there were also very few of his demonstrations that remained nonviolent. 

So what to do?  Violent protest (in almost all cases) is absolutely unBiblical and nonviolent is absolutely stupid.  The answer is…quit protesting.  For Christians, it seems that so much of our time is wrapped up in reacting.  We hear about a new bill or politician, or abortion clinic and we get all in a tizzy; when in reality if we had been doing our job of living as a counter culture and preaching the unadulterated Gospel the problems may not have gotten to the point they are at.  We waste so much time defending that we don’t have any time to do what we were made for, to love God and love people and make disciples in the process.  We need to start living the lives we proclaim and protest for and stop wasting time thinking up clever ways to tell homosexuals and abortion doctors we hate them as we pass them on the interstate.  Christ lived on earth in a way that was radical and different and people took notice.  He needed no signs or bracelets to let people know that change was coming…He was just different…amazingly different…and change occurred around Him.  It’s time for us to put down the signs and pick up our swords, the Word of God, and live it in a way that is unmistakable and impossible to look past.  Action speaks louder than billboards.  I might get a bumper sticker that says ::End Protesting::…what a waste.

Shaking the Dust…The Hardest Part of Evangelism

In the process of evangelism, the two most difficult processes are the beginning…and the end?  The first is obvious, between a mixture of nerves and fear and pride; the initial contact of reaching out to someone in word or deed in the name of Christ is quite often the most difficult.  But the end, surely not!?!  The end result of the proclaimation of the Gospel has to be salvation and why on earth would that be difficult (unless of course one lives with a Jonah mentalitly of mourning after someone’s repentance)? 

As anyone knows who has shared their faith or ministered to a non-believer in a missional way, the effort does not always end in the salvation of the soul.  While we could spend the post discussing the many doctrinal reasons that this happens (or doesn’t happen if we looked at the entire doctrinal gauntlet), I shall refrain.  Ultimately, we know that not all those who hear will come.   So, from that knowledge we learn the hard truth that the end can be even more difficult than the beginning.

When Jesus sends out the twelve in Matthew 10 to minister to and proclaim the kingdom of heaven to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel,” He commands them to do so, but if they do not heed their words, to shake the dust off the feet and leave them to their return.  We also see instances where Jesus is approached by those wishing to follow Him, but He asks things of them they are not willing to give up and He continues on His way (Mk 10:17-31; Luke 9:57-62).  He gives His followers instructions like “do not give dogs what is Holy…” and we start to see a picture of Jesus that is somewhat startling…He let people go.  But…how could a loving Christ who came to seek and to save that which was lost just allow the lost to walk out the door without knowing Him?  Simply because He understood, better than anyone, that there are some who would not come and He spent the majority of His time ministering to those who would and prepping them to go reach the others.  His time here, like ours, was short. 

Just as Jesus did this, He also instructed His disciples (and in turn those who believe today) to do the same in their ministry.  Time here on earth is so precious and so vital that we need to reach out and fulfill our mission to it’s fullest while we are here.  While it seems a harsh solution, especially in a case where we have emotional or kinship relationships with those we minister to, there comes a time where we have to shake the dust off of our feet and move on.  While, with those closest to us, we should never give up and limit God’s redeeming power, but we need to be mindful of the fact that not all will come and, just like Christ, we need to place the bulk of our time into the responsive and make disciples just as we are commanded.

When a Day Is Not Simply a Day (or the question of the Creation days)

A question was raised on a discussion board for one of my classes  regarding the interpretation of the days of creation in the book of Genesis.  It is a topic, much like eschatology, that I have thought about a little and have an opinion, but not one that set in stone as of yet.  I listed the three main views (in a very simple and non-exhaustive way) below, along with my humble opinion. 

The Literal Seven Days theory is a “literalistic” view of the creation account wherein God created the earth in a literal week broken down in six 24 hour days with the final day reserved for rest.  While this would seem to be an obvious choice if you take the Bible “literally,” we know that there are instances in Scripture where this term is used not relating to an earth day, but an era or extended period of time.  Also, historical and scientific evidence allude to an older earth than this idea, which places the earth between 6,000-10,000 years old.

The Day Age Theory interprets the word “day” (Hebrew yom) not as a day of 24 hours, but as an extended period of time possibly extending to around 1,000 years each.  Most who oppose this view site it as contradicting to Exodus 20:11 and see it as an attack on the literal nature of Scripture.

The Gap Theory places large gaps b/t Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 which measure up to millions of years.  The Gap theory was used to try and reconcile with the scientific idea that the earth is billions of years old.  Most views of this theory resemble theistic evolution and sacrifice critical ideas in Scripture in order to line up with unproven “scientific” views of evolution and creation.

I tend to align myself more closely with the Day-Age theory, although the literal interpretation is also a strong possibility.  The Day-Age theory does not violate good hermanuetic technique nor the power and character of God and aligns well (without sacrificing Theological principles) with historical and scientific evidence.  Since the term “day” is used in Scripture in many ways, the idea that this theory is not a literal interpretation of Scripture is a bit harsh and not accurate.  If God did use a greater period of time to create the world, it would in no way show Him less powerful or less God (you could give me billions of years and I would not create a mushroom), but would show the careful and maticulous nature in which God deals with His creation.  Time is irrelevant to God other than the fact that He has given it to us to exist in, and whether He created the earth in seven days or seven thousand years, it is just as majestic and just as Holy.  Am I completely sold to this position through and through?  No, I am still searching and struggling through Scripture to know for sure, but right now it seems to be the most probable.

The Art of Practice

It is quite obvious that the Christian life is one based on balance.  The trend has usually been that those churches who were going and doing were putting a great deal of emphasis on the doing and leaving out the Word.  On the other hand, the churches that were dedicated to preaching the Word (and usually Reformed) were lack on the application and doing. 

It is quite encouraging to see that, in the midst of the post modern movement, there is a strong core of young reformed ministers and churches who have a dedication to the Word, but also to putting that knowledge in motion in a missional form.  The Great Commission goes far past just reaching people and holds instruction to teach them to obey the commands of Christ.  The potential of a church that ministers to people with the passion of Christ and devotes themselves to the teaching and learning of the Word of God is unlimited.

Wife Beating

My first couple years (and even continuing to now at times) in a Christian University were pretty disillusioning.  When you are completely surrounded by future ministers who are judgmental and competetive as well as hardcore BSU (Baptist Student Union) kids who are so cliche it hurts, it can become very easy to begin to have strong feelings against the church as a whole.  I am naturally a very critical person to begin with (which is something I have to struggle with on a constant basis anyway), so the mixture of that spirit with the constant barrage of caricature Christians who seemed to walk around in a little bubble unaffected by the world around them landed me in a bitter and angry place that had me writing a bunch of Derek Webb-esq songs about how stupid Christians were. 

Even before I was a minister, I have had a strong compassion for lost people, especially tragically lost people.  The more messy the more I was drawn to them.  That compassion did not translate, however, to Christians…especially the squeaky clean, sugary sweet youth group folks I went to college with.  The longer I was there, the more bitter I grew and the more open and bold I became with it.  In my preaching class, all of my sermons were on depravity or pointing my finger at Christians who neglect the orphans and widows with no encouragement at all…ever.  Ultimately it was self-righteousness at its purest form…I just hadn’t figured that out yet.  It all got to the point that I was so angry that I could not even pray.  I felt the church was worthless and that God should strike us down immediately and I would not talk to Him again until then.  What was worse, most of my close friends who were also “edgy” ministers in training jumped on board with me, thus I was convinced I was right. 

Eventually, however, the bitterness beat me down and ate away at me until I was utterly exhausted all the time from both the lack of sleep and the emotional turmoil I was battling while harboring all of these negative feelings.  I finally came to one of my friends who was not all swept up in this and tearfully confessed my bitterness and asked for some guidance on the issue.  He recommended that I write down all my feelings and match them up with Scripture.  Now, at the time I was all about Ezekiel and Jeremiah…so I was validated in my first biased scan.  However, looking through the Scriptures it is so evident that God desperately loves those that He has chosen.  Even His punishments came out of love in it’s purest form.  I was wrong and way out of line…as is usually the custom when people fall to an extremist view. 

Christ has an undying, unconditional love for His Church…His Bride.  My attackon her was a direct assault on something that Jesus loves enough to sacrifice Himself and experience the wrath of God in her stead.  Who was I to beat the Bride of the most Holy God?  The Christian life is hard enough to go through with the constant attacks from the world, thus the Body needs to take care of itself and love the other members.  We absolutely must love “sinners” as Christ did, but we should also be very mindful to not neglect loving the Church, whom Christ loves deeply.