Overlapping

There is an overlap of pictures in this image. Both are real but one does not overcome the other in terms of being the "true" picture. My visual sense can focus mostly on one over the other but not completely. The overlap causes this visual conflict.

My recent study of the various interpretations of the kingdom of God brought me to this picture. In many ways, the Christian life is lived in this type of overlap. The overlap is not visual but, instead, encompasses all the person - heart, mind, strength.

The kingdom of God is referenced in two groups of sayings. On the one hand, Jesus message in the Gospels points to an imminent future apocalyptic expectation in Jesus' message (Mk 1:14-15; Mk 9:1; Mk 14:25; Mk 6:10). On the other hand, some sayings point to the kingdom as a present reality or experience in the world (Mk 4:1-33; Mt 11:2-6; Mt 12:28; Mt 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21).

The tension between these two groups of sayings has led to various theories about the kingdom. 1. Jesus is viewed as an eschatological prophet who (like his contemporaries) expected and proclaimed the Kingdom as an imminent, eschatological event.
2. The 'present' or 'realized' sayings are authentic while the 'future' or 'apocalyptic' syaings are secondary.
3. Jesus was an eschatological prophet who proclaimed that the kingdom of God had been inaugurated in his person and ministry, but with a dramatic consummation in the future. (theories given in my Gospel of Mark class last spring).

The third provides a balance approach that holds the sayings in tension as we live in the overlap of the ages between the 'already' (Jesus' coming, death, resurrection, ascension, exaltation) and the 'not yet' (Jesus' return in power). I believe that the reign of God (kingdom of God) that is present in this overlap of the ages is real but often rejected in favor of a this-world ("realized") focus or other-world (future kingdom) focus.

What do we miss by assuming that this world is all that there is? What do we miss by assuming that God will not reign until Christ's return? We miss the present reign of God where the Spirit has been given and Christ reigns at the right hand of the Father now.

Paul attempts to answer this in light of his urging of the Roman church to offer their bodies as living sacrifices. The "renewal of the mind" of Romans 12:2 is a renewal toward seeing God's present reign as we wait patiently for Christ's return. We must not sleep because our salvation is closer than when we first believed (Romans 13:11-14)... Am I watching? Or do I think that I am left to my own devices to create the kingdom by human hands or do I think that this world is "going down" so I should bury my head waiting for Christ's return?

I'd rather watch and act "decently as those who live in the day" in service of God and others.

Kingdom of 'Heaven'

My recent posts are reflections that have come flooding into my brain after being able to step back from the unending onslaught of reading/papers. I continue to realize that a lot of my faith assumptions throughout my life have been based on interpretatations that I heard once and then kept without questioning.

My recent posts are swings of the pendulum to the far other side of the spectrum from some of my starting points. I have let the pendulum, however, swing back more toward the 'middle' after engaging the topics. My recent discussion on the end times and current living is another example of this type of pendulum swing. One example of a contributor to this recent swing is my understanding/interpretation of the kingdom of God. I have always been confused as to whether the kingdom was equivalent to heaven or "within me" or related to Jesus' reign overall. Like all theological vacuums, because I didn't fill it with it a theological reflection, something else filled it. In my case, I assumed that the kingdom was equal to heaven. My guess is that this interpretation is strong for many who glance at the topic because Matthew's Gospel uses the description "kingdom of heaven." This doesn't hold true, however, if the word heaven was used in order to avoid using the word God for a Jewish audience (or a Gentile audience interacting with Jewish communties). If Jews couldn't say YAHWEH, then the term God in "kingdom of God" would have been a sticking point in conversations about the nature of Jesus.

If we assume that the kingdom of God refers to heaven then all the references about God's reign are simply jettisoned the far future in another world. Does this capture the essence of Jesus' proclamation that the "kingdom of God is at hand (is near)"? My answer is No. I will write another entry soon on just why that is so. Until then, I wanted to initially capture the pendulum swing that I am undergoing on this very topic...

Signing your name

I continue to actually listen to the questions that are being raised during my meditation on scripture and the readings from my studies. Admittedly, my brain is theologically drunk right now as I try to pray through and process the ideas that are challenging my faith and my understanding of the church. A recurring theme is "What you believe is how you live." In particular, I am exploring what this theme means in conversation with a person's understanding of what happens when they die and the emphasis that this understanding plays in the present moment.

What sources are intersecting on this theme?
1. My meditations in Romans - the real influence of apocalyptic thought in Paul's writing even in this epistle
2. Readings on eschatology in systematic theology
3. Brian McLaren's The Last Word and The Word After That
4. Previous experiences with those who pushed hard for premillenialism
5. My Christian experience as a conservative, evangelical, borderline (if not complete) fundamentalist.

The following argument is still underdeveloped but I want to get some thoughts out. The idea of how we live now according to what we know about what God has done and will do is seemingly basic. On one side of the spectrum, some live in fear of judgment because they are unsure if God truly has forgiven their sin. On the other side, some live without any fear due to the security of their salvation in Christ. What about the present time? What role does God play now in our lives as we live every day?

For most of my life, I have to admit that I have lived my life without any urgency for living out God's commands because of my "assurance of salvation." Is this what God intended by sending His Son to rectify the relationship between creature and Creator? How are we to live in this time between Christ's resurrection/ascension and Christ's return? What is the significance of the Son reigning at the right hand of the Father right now and the promised Holy Spirit at work right now? Is this life only meant to be a waiting room for the next where at best we view our life as a sanctification chamber? What does this type of relationship with God look like?

I had a conversation today with a friend about this very topic. During the talk, an idea that my friend Jon Chiu brought to my attention years ago came to mind. He posited that a 4 spiritual law approach to salvation without any other background was similar to having a person sign a Hallmark card with a generic note - "Hope your birthday's GREAT! Sincerely, Jeff" What is more sincere? 1. A personal note that is addressed to a specific person at a specific time based on a real relationship 2. A Hallmark card with only a name signed at the bottom.

A third possibility is a combination of both, a personal note that expands the generic statement/poem for that person. Either way, the most personal and important decision (to commit to being a follower of Christ) shouldn't be like merely signing your name and nothing else to a Hallmark card, should it? If it is, then the temptation to simply feel content that the card was sent will leave us without any urgency for cultivating that relationship further... right?

Excuse me...

I was in Panera Bread a few days ago and I witnessed a somewhat hilarious event.

A guy squawking on his cell phone with his cool new bluetooth device stuck in his ear. This guy, like many individuals who do not care about anybody else in the world, was talking loud enough for the whole place to hear his great sales pitch to his potential client. A woman sat down at the next table over and quickly became visibly annoyed. I watched a real live "boiling point" episode as she started to squirm. After a few mere seconds, she turned to the guy and said, "Excuse me, please shut the hell up!"

Here's my question, who was more inconsiderate?

Deconstruction

Deconstruction.

The classic statement about seminary (besides calling it 'cementary' due to the death of faith) is that seminary is a place where a person's faith is deconstructed. My response to that statement coming into my time at Princeton Theological Seminary was that I was not going to let "that place" deconstruct my faith. What I didn't consider was the possible advantage of deconstruction.

Questions like these were not on my already-defensive mind -
"How is my understanding of God limited?"
"What have others who have gone before me wrestled with?"
"How is my theology impacting my ministry and where does God want to deconstruct my assumptions and rebuild them?"

I have come to see how my faith coming into PTS was what many would consider too other-worldy in terms of salvation. If Christ died for our sins and we are justified, then what is the real incentive for caring about others in the here and now? Bonhoffer's Discipleship challenged me last year in this area and I continue to be challenged by my studies of Romans and eschatology in my system theology class. I will post more on these specifics as I process what I have crammed into my head throughout this semester. Overall, I see more clearly than ever that what we believe about God impacts how we live in the present moment as well as where we stand with God for eternity. It is both, not just one or the other.

Admittedly, my recent entries have been short and bereft of theological insights. I have been in survival mode but I am seeing some light in my adjustment period to having two kids. This afternoon, my wife and I received a break from parenting and we went to see the new Harry Potter. Most people love Harry Potter. As for me, I fell asleep... Nothing against HP but I guess my body was able to relax and that led to an automatic shut-down. Hopefully that won't happen tomorrow in class....

This sign describes my world right now. I think that I went to bed around 3:57 AM last night. I was just woken up by a screaming baby at 3:57 PM. I looked at the window and I thought "Wow, daylight savings time is out of control! It is light outside at 3:57 AM!!!" These are not deep theological thoughts but these are the thoughts that I am having. I am reading some of my class reading but mostly my mind is occupied by the upsidedownness of life right now. Maybe Paul Tillich can correlate that existential question with a traditional belief in a new "baby-twilight zone" interpretative matrix... There is a thought...

Is this the graph that describes your day when you come to my blog? One of my favorite things to do is to locate crazy images through Google. I put in the word "thanks" in order to find a potential image for a lesson and I found a directory of hilarious pictures. This graph was one of them...

A Humiliating Experience (in the truest sense)

Every moment has been both a challenge and a joy since Avery came home from the hospital.

The changes in my life are innumerable and all of my daily/nightly patterns have been blown up. Intense life changes like this reveal how selfish I am. I can't even begin to count how many selfish, childish moments I have had in the past 2 weeks. I have realized how much I really do not look out to the interests of others (Philippians 2:4) but only to my own. I took some time tonight to step away from being a husband, a dad, a student, a friend, and everything else. I picked up The Way of a Pilgrim again and I read this "confession of an interior man leading to humility." I will write the first part in this post but the others may come later. These words capture much of what I feel often. It is a long read but it worth it...

A Way of a Pilgrim - pp. 113-115

Turning my gaze at myself and attentively observing the course of my interior life I am convinced, through experience, that I love neither God nor my neighbor, that I have no faith, and that I am full of pride and sensuality. This realization is the result of careful examination of my feelings and actions.

1. I do not love God. For if I loved Him, then I would be constantly thinking of Him with a heartfelt satisfaction; every thought of God would fill me with joy and delight. On the contrary, I think more and with greater eagerness about worldly things, while thoughts of God present difficulty and aridity. If I loved Him, then my prayer communion with Him would nourish, delight, and lead me to uninterrupted union with Him. But on the contrary, not only do I not find my delight in prayer but I find it difficult to pray; I struggle unwillingly, I am weakened by slothfulness and am most willing to do anything insignificant only to shorten or end my prayer. In useless occupations I pay no attention to time; but when I am thinking about God, when I place myself in His presence, every hour seems like a year. When a person loves another, he spends the entire day unceasingly thinking about his beloved, imagining being with him, and worrying about him; no matter what he is occupied with, the beloved does not leave his thoughts. And I in the course of the day barely take one hour to immerse myself deeply in meditation about God and enkindle within myself love for Him, but for twenty-three hours with eagerness I bring fervent sacrifices to the idols with passions! I greatly enjoy conversations about vain subjects which degrade the spirit, but in conversations about God I am dry, bored, and lazy. And if unwillingly I am drawn into a conversation about spiritual matters, I quickly change the subject to something which flatters my passions. I have avid curiosity about secular news and political events; I seek satisfaction for my love of knowledge in worldly studies, in science, art, and methods of acquiring possessions. But the study of the law of the Lord, knowledge of God, and religion does not impress me, does not nourish my soul. I judge this to be an unessential activity of a Christian, a rather supplementary subject with which I should occupy myself in my leisure time. In short, if love of God can be recognized by the keeping of His commandments - "If anyone loves me he will keep my word," says the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:23), and I not only do not keep His commandments but I make no attempt to do so - then in very truth I should conclude that I do not love God. St. Basil the Great confirms this when he says, "The evidence that man does not love God and His Christ is that he does not keep His commandments."

Agape or Not...

I have heard 3409830498304982 sermons/messages/talks/lessons on agape (unconditional love).

The reality of this is like many other aspects of Christianity in that it fades in and out of focus. All relationships include times where different aspects fade in and out. The addition of Avery Ruth to my family has opened my eyes in a fresh way to characteristics of unconditional love. Avery has nothing to give me in terms of approval or agreement. She may stop crying when I pick her up or simply make eye contact. Overall, however, she cannot "give" me anything. On the other hand, Cambria who is almost 2 1/2 years old can run to me and say "Daddy" or laugh at my stupid voices or make me feel good by saying "I love you Daddy." At points, Cambria's love is conditional and I can provide the thing to which she responds. I have been disturbed by how much I can sense in my spirit this difference. In fact, I can sense that I want to get a response from Cambria when I only get cries and some more cries (at this point) from Avery.

Doesn't this whole post show my selfishness? Isn't it amazing how God uses massive changes in a person's life to reveal just how ridiculous the human heart is when a sobering review is made of it...?

Avery Ruth Lee

Avery Ruth Lee was born at 2:09 PM yesterday on 11/8/05 at 7 lbs 13 oz, 21.5 inches. She is currently in the special care unit but she is well on her way to being fully healthy and out of there. Laurie was nothing short of a warrior throughout the intense labor that was an intense 1 hr 15 minutes from hospital arrival until the birth. More pictures will be coming soon. We are grateful for everyone who was praying for us. The miracle of God's gift in the form of life, life somehow that comes from two people and looks/acts like them, has been realized again. Praise God!

Eating alone (at the Lord's Supper???)

Last night, I participated in an alternative Eucharistic worship service. The theme of the 'table of Christ' was repeated but the reality was there was no table (it didn't have to be a physical table). Each person stood up, went alone, received the bread and wine/grape juice, sat down, prayed alone, thanked God alone, confessed alone, and then there was a corporate prayer at the end.

Is the Lord's Supper or communion or the eucharist meant to be a lonely McDonald's experience?

Have you ever eaten alone at McDonald's? You get your food, sit down, eat quickly (maybe with something to read or now some McDonald's have TVs to watch). You are only concerned about yourself and what you are getting from the meal.

My recent experiences would lead me to answer affirmatively to the question "Is the Lord's Supper like a lonely McDonald's experience?". I have been challenged by a reading from Martin Luther where he reminded his readers that the Lord's Supper was not just for individuals. The problem is that many Christians approach the Lord's Supper only with a personal "me and Jesus" mindset in our individualistic world. I was taught as a kid to give thanks for Christ's sacrifice on the cross and to confess my sins while meditating on the cleansing blood of Christ. I still believe that this is a necessary part of the experience but is there more? If the purpose of the Lord's Supper is to thank and confess, then can't I do that at home or by myself somewhere else?

Here are some ironic observations that I (and I hope others) have made...
- we speak of gathering around a table but we 'eat and drink' alone in our thoughts
- we speak about the body of Christ but only in terms of what Jesus did for me while others are sitting right next to me (many of whom I do not know at all)
- we speak of Jesus dying 'for many' but again we only think about individual selves in the many

Paul says in 1 Corinthians 10:16-17 "The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread." This passage is often overlooked in favor of the "do this in remembrance of me" passages. The focus in 1 Corinthians 10 includes the idea of the body of Christ as opposed to a single member of that body. Martin Luther challenged his readers to also consider the "other" that is sitting right next to you. We need to reconsider how to lift up the prayer "forgive us our sins" with "as we forgive those who sin against us."

Look around the room the next time you 'take' communion or the Lord's Supper or celebrate the Eucharist. Consider those who are around you. Pray for them. If needed, ask forgiveness and/or forgive others. Remember, we are the body of Christ, not a bunch of individuals... Remember, we don't want to look like the guy eating alone at McDonald's...


"I'll take a number 1 = bread with wine via dipping"
"I'll take a number 2 = bread with grape juice via dipping"
"I'll take a number 3 = wafer with wine from a single cup"
"I'll take a number 4 = wafer with grape juice in a cup"
"I'll take a number 5 .....

Catching a leaf

A subject that I come back to over and over is the challenge of living in the moment.

I have had a couple of experiences in the past 24 hours that are helping me to see how to actually do this. Yesterday, I went to Lake Carnegie near where I live in order to get a break from studies, baby-anticipation, and all the noise of life. I sat on a wall overlooking the lake and took a deep breath. I thought to myself, "This is living in the moment." What was different about that moment? I wasn't thinking about any upcoming school assignments or obligations to anybody. My only focus was on the cool breeze, beautiful trees, and honking geese. That was living in the moment.

Another moment occurred last night when my daughter was trick or treatin (is that a phrase a verb?). She came out from an apartment and said, "Daddy, I want to go to more houses!" She was enjoying simply receiving candy. I saw her joy and I paused. That was living in the moment.

Finally, I just went for a short walk. During the walk, I reflected on a sermon that I heard in theology class yesterday based on "For it is by grace that you have been saved." The sermon was by Karl Barth and at one point he focused on having a carefree approach to life that results from living under God's grace. He challenged the audience to ask for grace. I asked for grace on my walk. I asked for help in the area of living in the moment. A few minutes later I noticed a leaf falling. I grabbed it. I realized that if I hadn't been simply living in the moment then I would have missed that leaf. I wasn't thinking days, hours, or even minutes ahead.

That was living in the moment.

I need to be more open to moments like that. What "leaves" am I missing?

Yes, that ending sounded like a bad sermon ending but the question still stands... :)

Enough Time?

I just heard someone checking his voicemail when he was in the bathroom... I know that tend to multi-task in very creative ways but I haven't gone there yet. Do we really feel like there is not enough time so that we have to check our voicemail while going to the bathroom???

Change in Perspective

I received a lesson on perspectives.

Daylight savings time was always welcomed. "Falling back" meant an extra hour of sleep and happiness. I received a new perspective now that I am a parent of a toddler. "Falling back" now means that a child who was waking up at 6:15 AM now wakes up 5:15 AM. That does not equal sleep and happiness... A new perspective on the same thing that I've taken for granted for over 28 years....

Blogging vs. Paper-writing

I often feel mentally paralyzed when I start to write a paper. The feeling is eerily similar to my experiences with computer programming during my undergrad time at UVa. I usually have the flow of the paper in my mind but I always have a difficult time launching into the actual writing. On the other hand, I do not feel that way when I click over to this blog and start typing away. Last year, I used this as a place to unclog my brain by writing out some initial ideas before I launced into writing an actual paper.

I am currently working on a Romans exegesis paper for Romans 12:1-2. The storyline for the paper is that rational worship is the key for renewing the people of God. These two verses come at a transition point in the letter to the Romans where the apostle Paul transitions from an exposition of the gospel of God to a section of exhortations for the newly formed one people of God. Paul began his exposition of the gospel in chapter 1 after describing it as the "it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek." This gospel was everyone who has faith and opens the way for the one people of God.

Paul quickly moved to a picture of all humanity that is able to see God's invisible qualities but does not respond with thanksgiving or praise. The misplaced praise is instead funneled toward the creation as opposed to the Creator. The result of this idoltary is humanity's thinking became futile and it's minds became darkened. Paul lists the outcome of this darkened mind in the form of human behavior that degrades the body and lists of vices that result in a community marked by selfish behavior. The first 11 chapters of Romans show how all of humanity is in need of the gospel that Paul describes because, as he states in 11:32, "for God has imprisoned all in disobedience so that he may be merciful to all."

After a short doxology that affirms the riches and wisdom of the knowledge of God, the transition verses of Romans 12:1-2 are found. What does Paul accomplish with this transition? Paul asserts that rational worship, as opposed to the irrational worship found in idoltary, reverses the darkened mind and opens the way for the one people of God to discern God's will and live in a community marked by selfless behavior. This can only be accomplished by the mercies of God. These mercies are described in the righteousness of God depicted in the first 11 chapters. The one people of God, both Jews and Gentiles, who exist without the Torah and the temple cult now must offer themselves as living sacrifices in order to live as community that responds to God's grace. The following sections of exhortation (parenesis) only make sense in light of the continual renewing of the mind found in rational worship.

The key words and phrases located in Romans 12:1-2 along with their uses in other parts of Scripture provide the foundation for this assertion.

therefore
mercies of God - II Cor 1:3, Hebrews 10:8
appeal
brothers (and sisters)
present - Romans 6:13; 6:16; 6:19
your bodies - Romans 6:6; 8:11; 1 Corinthians 6:20; Philippians 1:20
living sacrifices - Hebrews 13:15-16; Philippians 2:17; 4:18; 1 Peter 2:5
holy and acceptable to God
rational - 1 Peter 2:2 (spiritual milk)
worship - noun is in Romans 9:4; Hebrews 9:1; verb found in Romans 1:9; 1:25, Hebrews 8:5; participle (one who worships) found in Hebrews 9:9; Hebrews 10:2
do not be conformed - 1 Peter 1:14
this age - 1 Corinthians 1:20; 2:6; 3:18
changed in form - 1 Corinthians 3:18
renewal
minds - Romans 1:28; Ephesians 4:17-25 (similar to Romans flow); Colossians 2:18
approve - Romans 1:28; 2:18; 14:22; Philippians 1:10; 1 Corinthians 16:3
the will of God
good, acceptable, and pleasing


Let's see what happens when I actually put this in a paper that includes my thoughts as well as input from commentaries and articles...

This may be the most dry blog entry you have ever read or it may be the a launching point for your own study of the material. Either way, this is admittedly self-serving because I needed to get something out of my thick head so that I can write this paper before my second child is born (any minute now!)...

Prayer of the Heart

I am learning more and more about the rhythms of my brain during my time at PTS. This year has proven to be a significant challenge with the combination of being a husband, a dad, a future dad of two (baby #2 is due in 2 weeks), a student, an intern, and sometimes a friend... I have been working through some energy management 'practices' with my mentor at PCNP but I am far from consistently practicing them (as I write on this blog when I should be going to sleep). One way that I have learned to relax is by a reading non-school book at night before I go to bed.

I decided to pick up a classic that I have heard about from numerous friends, mentors, and my wife - The Way of a Pilgrim. I was re-introduced to this book a few weeks ago when I led the Gathering @ PCNP in the Jesus Prayer (prayer of the heart most often associated with the Eastern Orthodox tradition). I decided to incorporate this prayer in my life, especially when I could sense that my body was being taken over by stress or anxious thoughts. The basic form of "Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me" is prayed by praying the first part "Lord Jesus Christ" when inhaling and "have mercy on me" when exhaling. I started to do this as a means of the prayer of the heart. The longer version of "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner" was introduced to me last year in Inquiring After God (TH 291) and I have used this longer version as well.

One quote from the book resonated with me when the pilgrim said in response to his time in jail, "All that had happened seemed not to affect me; it was as if I had watched someone else being treated. And when they flogged me, the Prayer strengthened and consoled me and I was oblivous to everything."

I haven't been jailed or flogged but I have experienced this sense of watching my circumstances from afar when I have experienced the peace of Christ in my life. I haven't sensed this recently but maybe as I jump into more times of the interior prayer I may start to experience the "peace that transcends all understanding" that I have often meditated on in Philippians 4:6-7.

Water skiing and Preaching?

I thought about water-skiing today.

I haven't attempted to waterski in years. One of the first things that I wanted to do after learning to swim was to waterski. I was 5 years old then. I attempted to waterski for the first time at Young Life Camp at Saranac when I was 17 years old. I failed miserably! I remember the day clearly. I tried 3x and each time I fell over only seconds into the attempt. Unfortunately, I haven't tried since then.

Why did thinking about water skiing today? I shared my first sermon today for my preaching class and the feeling was similar to my water skiing experience. The excitement was there but it was accompanied by a lot of anxiety. My desire was for my anxiety to be translated into humility and some of that happened. At points in the sermon, I felt like I fell over in the water and wanted to give up. At other times, I felt like I was able to hang with the challenge. Overall, the ride was a humbling experience but one that I am ready to embark on again. Unlike waterskiing, I am not giving up! Maybe one day I will try to water ski again...

Anyone wanna go?

More than an internship

I am currently leading a group of young adults at Presbyterian Church of New Providence (PCNP) for my field education internship. The opportunity goes way beyond an internship for me. I grew up in PCNP and now I find myself back at the church. The church has a completely different feel due to a new senior pastor and numerous changes to almost everything. I have been given the opportunity to lead the most challenging, in my opinion, group in the church - young adults. Young adults are overlooked and, to be frank, ignored in many churches.

Why? I think the real reason is because they are hard to "pin down." Another reason is I have seen that churches do not take them seriously because of their busy lives and lack of tithing. I definitely differ on the tithing aspect because I've seen that individuals in their 20s/30s are more willing than others to support the ministries where they see God at work.

Most churches have 'programs' for youth and for families with young children. The gap between high school graduation and the first kid is a big one. I feel called at this point to be a leader to help address this gap. I am convinced that God's upside down way of working in the church (taking the least and making them the greatest) applieis to this gap.

If anybody is actually reading this, then do you see this pattern in your church? If you don't go to church, then if you ever checked out a church, did you feel like this was true?

Postless blog?

Where are the posts?

I have heard this from some friends who have actually come to this blog. I am currently suffering from postless disease where I often know what I want to post but I rarely do it.

I have been in a valuable dialog with my senior pastor about energy management in ministry. I have been monitoring my daily energy patterns and I have noticed our posts like these definitely require energy. I believe that the energy is worth using especially since I need an outlet for the 30943049830948098 thoughts that I have every day. I can definitely say that I am "theologically drunk" again this year after having a good summer to sober up through reflection.

In that light, I will start to use my creative energy here again and this will not be the postless blog that has existed. My meditations on Romans passages, reflections on Christology, exposure to viewing the church missionally, reworking of my teaching/preaching method, and humbling experiences at Presbyterian Church at New Providence will be here soon.

I may be writing to myself but isn't that what most blogs are anyway... This is a greenhouse for ideas and my desire is that friends and others will post comments as I work through ideas.

Grace isn't for holding

Two of my classes intersect quite often this semester. The one class is a Greek interpretation class of Romans and the other is a introductory course on missional theology. The intersection makes sense since Romans is considered by many to be the greatest description of the gospel and missional theology involves mission (the sending).

I will write more about the specifics of missional theology as I continue in my learning but the main piece that has struck me is how much the Scripture is composed of missio Dei (God's mission) - God's self-revelation as the One who loves the world, God's involvement in and with the world, the nature and activity of God, which embraces both the church and the world, and in which the church is privledged to participate (Transforming Mission by David Bosch, p. 10).

Now back to the intersection. A few days ago, my Romans class focused on Romans 1:1-17. Romans 1:5 states (NIV) "Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith."

The point that jumped out from considering the entire letter to the Romans and the themes of sending (among others) included in it was found in the combination of grace and apostleship. For Paul, in this verse, one does not exist without the other. Grace is not for our keeping. Grace is coupled with apostleship or the sending out. The rest of verse 5 states why we are sent out - to call people from among all the Gentiles...

How much do I focus on God's grace without focusing on the accompanying responsibility of being sent to the world? Grace isn't for holding.

Righteousness of God

I love meditating on Scripture because I always realize the assumptions that I bring to the Bible and then God challenges me to consider if they are true. One example of this type of challenge is my view of righteousness.

I just spent 3 days interacting with Romans 1:1-17. I read it in English, I translated the Greek, I did an inductive study, I formed my own provisional conclusions, I read one commentary, I attended a lecture on the passage, and then I read another commentary. The foremost challenge to my assumptions going in was to my view of the righteousness of God as being for the individual person who stands condemned by God. This is one aspect of the righteousness mentioned.

I started, however, I ask the following questions:
- What is the difference between holiness and righteousness?
- How did the readers of Romans in the 1st century understand righteousness?
- Based on the content of the letter, is this righteousness solely for the individual or is there a larger view that I am missing?

The first question came because I have always read Romans 1:17 as the righteousness of God was revealed so that the unrighteous individual received God's righteousness so that he would be saved and not condemned. Is this the total picture of righteousness that Paul is stating? Am I simply using righteousness as a synonym for holiness where I am now considered holy by the work of Jesus on the cross?

God's righteousness, as viewed by Israel, could be defined as God's right actions based on what they knew about God as revealed through their Scripture and the covenant. The people of God, Israel, had confidence (faith) that God would do the right thing based on his convental relationship with the people.

How does this fit into Romans 1:17? Does the righteousness of God (or from God) mean more than what I stated earlier? I now believe that the righteousness of God that was revealed in Christ Jesus is God's right action in responding to evil and sin in the world. This is what we would 'expect' God to do based on his promises, both to the Jews and to Gentiles.

Maybe the righteousness of God is aimed more at the cosmic struggle between good and evil more than the individual salvation of a soul. Yes, the individual salvation based on faith in work of Jesus Christ on the cross is part of this picture but maybe it isn't the starting point. Maybe starting with the cosmic view is where Paul wants us to start as opposed to the individual "what's in it for me" view that I have often brought to Scripture.

Praise God that the righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel!

I'm Lovin' It

I had to adopt the McDonald's slogan for how I am feeling right now. I'm Lovin' It!

Those words are what my entire being felt yesterday as I finished a study session at Starbucks (yes, I am a Starbucks guy and not a Small World guy). I had just finished reading parts of assignments for 3 of my classes.

Last year, I thought to myself, "Why am I here?", regarding Princeton Theological Seminary. I had come to this seminary for a myriad of reasons and one of them was to interact with a postmodern world instead of simply setting it up and shooting it down from a conservative seminary. My experience matched my desire for that interaction even though I didn't feel comfortable most of the time (is being comfortable ever a good thing?). I did, however, question whether I wanted to spend the next 2 years of my life in the land of extreme discomfort. I questioned and prayed about leaving this place.

I know that I made the right decision to stay here. My conclusion is not based on the fact that I am taking courses this semester that appeal more to my high view of Scripture and more conservative positions, even though that definitely is a major factor. I said "I'm lovin it!" yesterday because I know that I am experiencing exactly what I wanted to experience here at PTS - interacting with a postmodern world. Even better, I now see that my faith, that has changed since I've been here, has been rooted in legitimate places and I understand somewhat that there is a place for me in the leadership of God's bride, the church...

I'm lovin it!

Hear the words... They are true today (let's see if they remain true in coming months)

Motivation?

The majority of questions, for those who are outside the situation, surrounding the crisis in Louisiana (and beyond) have not centered on the classic question of "Why would God let this hurricane hit New Orleans?" Instead, a majority of questions have focused on the chaos in the city - looting, shooting at rescue teams, convention center compound, the abandonment of the elderly and children.

The questions come from a wide variety of angles (spiritually, politically, "what the heck is going on"-ally). I cannot even begin to count the amount of questions that I have heard or that I have thought on my own over the past 4 days. I thought about trying to write about one or more of them today but I will, instead, list off as many as come to mind. I will say that the first one has been the one that has been pulling at my soul the most.

- What is the motivation for an individual or a group to be selfless in a situation like the Katrina crisis when all worldly incentives (money, job security, prestige, etc.) are removed? More specifically, why would a police officer stay on staff to help when his/her whole world has also has been destroyed and there is no financial incentive to stay perform his/her duty? This question arose when I heard that almost 40%-50% of the police force simply left duty. This question also applies to every example of looting and the other examples that elicit a "how can people being doing THAT" response.

- Where is the prophetic Christian voice to address the real problem of sinful, selfish actions? I envision millions of paralyzed Americans watching 24-hour news reports about the rapes, shootings, and looting. They are thinking, "How can this happen here and why is this happening?" Columbine, 9/11, and now post-Katrina atrocities all clamor for a voice to speak into the situation. The voice must provide a true Bibilical response that starts from a Biblical worldview that includes how we got to where we are (the Fall) and how we can have hope in Jesus Christ (redemption). This redemption applies at the individual and system levels of society.

- Has the media's portrayal of the U.S. military around the world impacted how our own citizens reacted to the U.S. military in New Orleans? In other words, have the non-stop reports of the U.S. military's failures in Iraq eroded the average U.S. citizen's view of the military to the point that shooting at a U.S. military helicoptor wasn't a big deal in New Orleans?

- What has the Department of "Homeland Security" been doing in the past 4 years? If a hurricane can cause this much anarchy then what will a dirty bomb or a nuclear bomb do to this country?

- How did a hurricane transform a major U.S. city into a place that includes scenes similar to the scenes of Iraq and Rwanda? The references to rapes are the most horrifying.

- What is are the similarities and differences between Katrina and 9/11? Why is my feeling similar but different?

- How much should I watch 24-hour news in order to understand the situation and have a genuine sense of compassion for the people who are suffering? At what point, should I turn it off and find other ways to deal with crisis from afar besides consuming endless reports?

- Is the fear resulting from Katrina rooted in humans facing the reality that they cannot control nature? Humans constantly want to control nature in order to create a predictable, safe space in which to live. How has Katrina's strike at this very assumption of safety and control increased the fear of Americans for the future?

There are at least 3904834098309 more questions but these are the ones that came flying off of my typing fingers right now. If anyone reads this, then I'd love to hear about which question you have asked the most (whether the question is in my list or not).

Strangly Silent...

I have been strangely silent about the disaster in Louisiana because I, like the rest of us, have been trying to wrap my head around what has happened. I came across this picture while viewing a set of picture repositories about Katrina. This picture was taken 1-2 days before Katrina arrived. The men were securing the tree from being blown over. They, like the rest of us, had no idea of the extent of the physical damage that would occur.

The other types of damage have had a lot deeper impact on both those who experienced Katrina first-hand and those who are experiencing the disaster via 24-hour news from afar...

On another note, why did these men think that they could secure the tree with the work of humans (tying it with a rope to the ground) as opposed to putting faith in the roots of the tree?

Matthew 4

I received an indirect challenge from a friend recently when he said that he was trying to read a chapter per day in the Bible and recording an idea. I often jump around Scripture during my times of meditation and journaling but I haven't walked through a book in a long time. I decided to select two sections of Scripture as the focus of my meditations - Matthew and Psalm 119.

Today's meditation is from Matthew 4. The short version (for blog scanners) is the direct annd indirect references to Jesus as the true Moses and the true Elijah point to Jesus as the fulfillment of the law and the prophets as the true Israel (Son of God).

Matthew 4

Three verses, different ones than normal, jumped out at me.
Matthew 4:1 - Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil.
Matthew 4:12 - When Jesus heard that John had been put in prison, he returned to Galilee
Matthew 4:17 - From that time on Jesus began to preach, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near."

Matthew 4 is the classic temptation text where Jesus responds to Satan's three tests. Jesus' use of Scripture, references to Deuteronomy 8:3, 6:16, and 6:13, to combat the devil's temptation is well documented and I won't take time to analyze it here. The one detail that I have overlooked in the past is that all three of Jesus' uses of Scripture are from Deuteronomy, the great book of the Law.

The three short descriptions of Jesus' movements and actions caught my attention this time. These descriptions point to Jesus as the fulfillment of the law and the prophets as the true Israel. Jesus is the tried and true Son of God who is capable to be a blessing and light to all peoples, first to the Jews, then to the Gentiles.

Jesus is led into the desert by the Spirit to be tested. Unlike Moses who disobeyed God by striking the rock to produce water (Numbers 20:9-13), Jesus obeyed God by not giving in to Satan. Furthermore, Jesus refers to Deuteronomy, the great book of the law, for his responses. Moses' disobedience and the grumbling of the hungry, thirsty, and tired Israelites kept them in the desert 40 years. Jesus was done in 40 days.

The next two narrative descriptions that I mentioned above show the beginning of how Jesus fulfilled the prophets. John came before Jesus preaching, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near" (Matthew 3:2). Jesus, up to this point, had not preached. He had only been baptized. Jesus returns to Galilee when John is put in prison and he began to preach the same message (exact same words in Matthew 4:17). Jesus takes over and fulfills the ministry of John.

Jesus points out that John's ministry was Elijah coming first in Matthew 17:10-13. Elijah was a great prophet. In taking over John's ministry, Jesus is fulfilling the ministry of Elijah whose call was to call people back to the one true God, Yahweh.

Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the law and the prophets but that he came to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). Jesus' 40 days and 40 nights of obedience and Jesus' preaching of John's message reveal Jesus as the fulfillment of the ministry of Moses as law and Elijah as prophet. Later on, Jesus is revealed in the transfiguration with Moses and Elijah in his presence (Matthew 17:1-9). Matthew 4 continues to build the case that Jesus is th true Israel by showing him as the true Moses (law) and true Elijah (prophet) as the fulfillment of the law and prophets as the true Israel (Son of God).

The wisest man in Athens...

Socrates realized something that every person should consider...

I have been reading a book written by a former Princeton Seminary professor Diogenes Allen titled Philosophy for Understanding Theology. The book provides a very helpful descriptions of specific examples of philosophy that have informed theology throughout church history. I have always avoided philosophy but I have come to the realization that the study of philosophy opens doors of interpretation of the Bible, especially the letters of the Apostle Paul.

In the second chapter, Allen describes how the oracle of Delphi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi) had said that Socrates was the wisest man in Athens. Socrates did not believe this assertion until he started to question his fellow citizens concerning the nature of virtue. The answers included contradictions and Socrates determineded that they did not know. Socrates concluded that the oracle of Delphi was correct.

Allen describes his conclusion as "he was the wisest man in Athens, for he knew that he knew nothing, whereas his fellow citizens thought that they knew but they did not." (Philosophy for Understanding Theology, 40)

In many ways, I feel like this provides a window into my first year at Princeton Seminary. I am not saying that I am the wisest man in Princeton but I am saying that I feel like I interact with individuals every day who think that they know but they do not. I am one of many who does not know. I do not know theology. I cannot even begin to say that I have "figured it out."

I constantly see how individuals here put on a facade that they are figuring it out when they are just as confused as everyone else. The reality is that most individuals talk past each other without truly interacting. Individuals are in their own silo of thinking because they are scared to appear stupid. The reality is that we are all theological adolescents who have cracking voices when we share our ideas that are far from being finalized.

My sense is that we would learn a lot more from each other and from the individuals teaching us if we were as humble as Socrates and admitted what he admitted. I am not sure what will happen during my second year but I definitely will be looking for others who admit that they do not have it all figured out. From there, we can then more humbly share what we are learning together as opposed to trying to figure it out all by ourselves.

Positive competition?

Is there ever anything positive about competition?

I participate in a wide variety of competitions and I still do not have a final answer to this question. Trash talking is a key component to any male friendship. I often enjoy poking fun at friends and they do not withhold their vitriolic responses. My earliest memories of talking trash go back to my elementary school days when I used to fight off Yankee fans all the time (shhh... I am a Mets fan). I once started a massive food fight in school due to my inability to control my emotions about a comment regarding the inferiority of the Mets!

I have supposedly grown up but now I have the pleasure of owning my own baseball team in the form of a fantasy baseball team. In fact, I own two teams in different leagues. I have been a part of one league for over 7 years and the rivalries are fierce. I haven't won a league championship and, in fact, I haven't come close. The pride of each individual member of the league is very evident in the message board posts and other conversations surrounding the league.

This past week I boiled over when I discovered over 30 messages in my email account that related to the league. A majority of the messages pointed out that I was an obvious favorite to LOSE. The messages included an in-depth analysis of the points and match-ups in the league. The time and energy spent on generating that analysis was significant. My initial thought was, "How can these guys spend THAT much time crunching data to come to these conclusions?"

I reflected on how I used to work at as a software developer and I would have tons of time every day to do the same analysis. Even moreso, I thought about how I used to be paid a lot of money for doing that. I decided to let my fantasy league "friends" know what I thought about the fact that they are getting paid to do a bunch of nothing! I posted a statement that made sure to let them know what I thought about their analysis.

I haven't talked to any of the league members in days...

Is there anything positive about competition?
Should competition lead to broken friendships?
Does competition feed the fire of pride as opposed to putting it to death?
Does competition have any place in the Christian life?

My initial, knee-jerk response is "NO!" Get rid of competition! Remove yourself from all forms of it. If pride is fed by something, then cut it out of your life!

Is this the mature Christian response? Christians are called to maturity and my interpretation of that reality is a life that is not run by simple rules with the expectation that rule-abiding is the solution or the end game. The God of Christianity is the one who initiated relationship with humanity through the calling of the people Israel and then the incarnation in Jesus Christ and the gift of adoption into the family of God in Christ. Simple rules are for toddlers who need to be shown how to live the basics of life and how to respect authority. Simple rules do not apply to complex situations if the person is solely looking to follow the rule "just because" as opposed to living out the true spirit of the rule or guideline. A mature person lives according to wisdom based on the given guidelines and life experiences. The Bible is the source of the guidelines as well as examples of individuals who have made mature and immature decisions.

How does this relate to fantasy baseball and competition? My response now is that competition can be positive if it keeps friends connected through a means that draws them together. I wouldn't be in close contact with 6-7 friends in Virginia (some going back to my days at UVa) if I wasn't in the league. Competition is negative if I let the results (my losing) control me and my interactions with my friends. Again, I cite the example that I haven't spoken with my friends in days. Each person needs to determine how to live in the tension of competition and friendship.

The apostle Paul addresses the mature Christians approach to gray areas like competition when he writes in 1 Corinthians 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me" - but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible to me" - but I will not be mastered by anything.

Go and decide if competition is positive for you?

I would love to hear a feminine perspective on this subject. Competition comes in many forms.

JFK?

A friend of mine who blogs at http://dbcoleman.blogspot.com/ pointed me to what he describes as a pseudo-psychology test that matches you with a leader. The test is located at http://similarminds.com/othertests.html

I took the full 45 question test and I was matched up with JFK...

The result was very disturbing to me not because it was JFK but because of the side description. I do not put a lot of stock in pseudo-psychological tests but this one definitely has made me think...

A True Moment

I have a problem focusing in on the present moment. My mind is often focused on other ideas or plans. I constantly have to resist my tendency to think ahead. The result of this habit is I often am not 100% engaged with the individuals who are right in front of me or the task that I am doing. A break-through moment comes every so often and I have a moment of true clarity and sensitivity of the present.

I had a moment like that last night.

I am currently helping with a small, weekly worship gathering at the seminary (http://tuesdaynightworship.blogspot.com). Each week 20-30 individuals gather near where I live to have a cook-out and a time of prayer and worship. My good friend Alec is the key leader and I am helping with the prayer/worship time.

The focus of this past week's gathering is summarized in Psalm 119:37 which says "Turn my eyes from looking at vanities; give me life in your ways." The prayers, the songs, and the sharing all centered on the action of turning away from anything that gets in the way of us and the Lord.

One of my favorite worship songs is "Give Us Clean Hands" by Charlie Hall. The words are as follows:

We bow our hearts
We bend our knees
Oh Spirit come make us humble
We turn our eyes from evil things
And Oh Lord we cast out our idols

So give us clean hands Give us pure hearts
Let us not lift our souls to another

Oh God let us be a generation that seeks
That seeks your face Oh God of Jacob


This song was the final song in the worship set. Lifting up that song with the group renewed my focus on what is real.

Almost everybody stayed around for 30 minutes or so after the prayer and worship time. I heard laughing. I heard individuals introducing themselves to strangers. I heard strangers become new friends. I heard stories being told. I experienced community. I was not thinking ahead. I was living in the present. I definitely had a true moment.

Breaking bread (or burgers), dedication to the teachings in the Bible, prayer... sound familiar?

pornography makes the transition

what is it about after-school special shows that draws individuals in and doesn't let them go?

i have heard from many how they turn on an after school special on ABC and they can't turn them off. many normally have to do with a person or family who is dealing with a substance abuse issue or a relational abuse problem.

a friend recently shared an observation that pornography was the issue of the day for an after school special on TV. in particular, he noticed how the portrayal of the dad's use of pornography and the resulting marital and overall familial problems was scarily similar to other after-school specials that focused on other addictions.

what does this say about the impact of pornography on the family? in addition, does this show that 'society' is starting to see the negative effects of pornography as it plays out more and more like an addiction instead of a "personal choice" that doesn't hurt anybody?

what does "personal" mean anyway? especially in this example...

open to interruptions?

i heard a description of a servant this weekend that caught my attention. a person described a person who serves as someone who is able to be interrupted.

i have heard this aspect of serving used before but that didn't take away the weight of truth i encountered in the statement. i realized again how much i do not like to be interrupted when i have my plans set. in fact, i get very annoyed when something comes up.

an interruption to my plans just occurred and i already know that i need to be willing to be interrupted in order to truly serve the person who needs my help...

the mysterious prophetic books

why are the books of the prophets intimidating to a majority of Christians?

the normal response to this question is the books seem far distant from the Christian experience located in Jesus Christ. the prophetic books seem to include random references to judgments on nations that mostly no longer exist. they also show the prophets taking part in odd symbolic actions. lastly, the words against social injustice potentially strike too close to home and are ignored.

i stayed away from the books of the prophets most of my life due to these reasons. i attempted to read through the entire book of Isaiah on an InterVarsity retreat but i stopped 1/3 of the way through because i was too frustrated. the references to Manasseh and Ephraim over and over were enough to put me to sleep. i actually fell asleep on my Bible (and probably drooled on the pages).

my appreciation for the prophets only came after i realized that 1 and 2 Kings provides the storyline behind the writings of the prophets. this observation is similar to Acts providing a story behind the founding of the churches to which Paul wrote his epistles. the stories found in 1 and 2 Kings, however, provide more details and reasons for the life and calling of the prophets. i now believe that each person needs to read 1 and 2 Kings before even beginning to wade through the prophets. in particular, the major prophets will remain particularly enigmatic without the background of the practices of Israel and Judah. In addition, the rise and fall of Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, and other nation states needs to be included in order to gain a full picture of the context of the prophets.

the largest obstacle to this understanding is laziness. a strong dedication is needed to gain the high-level and then a lower level view of the history of Israel and the prophets within the history. the first step is to read through 1 and 2 Kings with a map. the next is to locate the prophets prophets on a timeline with their locations (specific king such as Hezekiah, specific location such as northern kingdom of Israel). the third step is to read the prophetic books. finally, the final step is to pull together all the information gained above.

the result (probably after multiple iterations of this) is a better understanding of the story of Israel in which the prophets are set. the message of the prophets at a specific time to a specific audience will make sense. the alternative is to continue to randomly open up prophetic books and hope for the best as you read about the seemingly random judgments and references to Ephraim...

another window into the Old Testament

My first semester at PTS included a high-level introduction to the Old Testament. The main textbook, The Hebrew Bible by John C. Collins included a majority of the same criticisms of the Old Testament that I encountered during my intro to OT class at UVa 8-9 years ago. I walked away from the course with a new set of questions that remained unanswered. I did not have another resource to balance or challenge the questions besides the Biblical text itself.

A friend recommended, indirectly, a book by John Bright titled A History of Israel. The book takes a more balanced approach to describing the history of people of Israel. In particular, the very assertions that remained unchallenged in Collins' book are put in a wider discussion with other perspectives and findings.

The first idea that is put in a larger conversation is the documentary hypothesis (J E D P) - a largely 19th century hypothesis questioning Moses as the author of the Pentateuch and, instead, positing multiple sources pulled together. The description in Bright's book that caught my attention immediately was that numerous archaeological findings have been made since the formation of this hypothesis. One result of incorporating these findings into a conversation about the writings of the Pentateuch involves the discoveries that date to the times of the patriarchs. These show that the very writings of the Pentateuch or the traditions upon which they draw are similar to other writings from that time period. In other words, the Pentateuch cannot be simply dismissed as being written by individuals who lived after the exile of the Israelites to Assyria and Babylon as a way of explaining why Yahweh could let the exile happen to God's chosen people. The sources for the Pentateuch, instead, match closely to the traditions and writings of those near the times of the patriarchs.

Overall, this example, along with many others, shows me that extreme criticism of the Biblical text needs to be put in conversation with other research and writings that challenge these assertions. A quote from a friend sums this up when he stated that "many great minds have also put thought and research into ideas and have come up with different conclusions." Of course, I could jump out into a discussion of the motivations of scholars who hold to extremely critical views that have only been held in the past 100 years (a small breath in the depth of history) but that is for another day.

This entry has been long overdue. I am willing to listen to all perspectives but I have very little patience with perspectives that refuse to incorporate any challenges from others who interact with the same material from other angles.

the "right" kind of church

i recently had a conversation with a friend who says that he wants to find a church community but that he just can't find the "right" kind of church.

i asked him what he meant by that and his response focused on the problem of politics in the church. he cited that he couldn't stand the thought of many people standing around complaining about X or Y and then not doing anything to correct it. he also made a scathing remark about the fact that many pastors preach reconcilation but then are the main initiators of fights.

i had two responses to these ideas.

the first was an internal defensive response that wanted to shout back with the reality that no organization is without fights or multiple opinions. i also wanted to make it clear that being a "solo" Christian is not an option, unless you want to remain in the same place.

the other response was a broken heart for him and for the many, many, many individuals who feel the same thing. unfortunately, the movement to "non-denominational" churches hasn't solved that problem as the same problems are found in those churches as the big "institutions." my heart was broken because this barrier is keeping many individuals from the community that they need, even if the community includes potential and often realized back-stabbing, gossip-happy, competition-driven, self-righteous people.

he stated that he couldn't wait to come to the church that he wants me to start. i quickly responded that i would let him down much like every other pastor has let him down but that i would try my best, in God's grace, to be a servant and shepherd of the people that God puts under my care.

what is the type of church that can be the "right" kind of church for this person?

one aspect is certain. the "right" kind of church must be one that doesn't focus on itself but focuses on following Christ's example of being a servant. Scripture shows over and over how disunity comes when individuals look to their own desires and wants but that unity is present when the people are focused on God and God's work in the form of serving others. maybe one day, the person i talked with will be part of a church that is serving...

classic verse that still rings in my ear --
John 12:26
Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be. My Father will honor the one who serves me.


i must be months away from my seminary studies because i am actually quoting the Bible in this blog... that comment is enough to get a lot of people talking...

long hiatus over

i haven't written in awhile due to the insanity surrounding finals and the transition to the summer. i am now in the midst of a 8 week vacation. this is the most free time that i have had since the summer after 8th grade. of course, i do not have as much free time due to the responsibilities of being a husband and father but the lack of work changes my life significantly.

i have effectively de-toxed from the stress of school and i am now in a period of reflection. i plan on posting some of the remaining questions that are still looming from my first year at Princeton Theological seminary. i will also start to record my random illustrations that i run into through simply living.

this blog is not intended to change the world or to be even a place where anything significantly profound is written. i know that that i need a place to write my ideas and to let them grow or be killed. if anyone is actually reading this then please add a comment and say "hi."

more to come...

innovation

is the new or different idea always better than the idea that "has always been"...?

way too easy

it is way too easy to forget how much God has done for us...

way too easy...

test of belief

i heard a quote during a sermon in the PTS chapel yesterday that cut right to my heart. Lyle Watson, a PTS senior, referenced a quote by a former Professor Diogenes Allen when he said, "if you believe in a command, then it will judge you."

if you truly believe in a command...

that assumes that you are exposed to the command and that you believe that the command has authority in your life. furthermore, the source of the command, the Bible, must also be believed to be more than a collection of genres of literature that have pieced together for the benefit of the Christian community. the Bible must have real authority in your life and/or the community's life.

i can honestly say that i haven't felt judged by commands recently. i think that shows that i do not believe in them and that, in turn, shows that my belief in the Bible has been disrupted.

a return to a belief that the Bible is the witness of God revealed in Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit and that it has authority in life will, in turn, resurrect the judging power of the commands that are in it.

some things never change and Hebrews 4:12 continues to not return void to God "for the word of God is living and active, sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow, it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart."

emptiness

life is scheduled. life is full. life seems to be incorrect if stress is not always heightened (we even drink coffee to increase our stress).

addiction flourishes whenever there is no time for emptiness. we are intimidated by silence, intimidated by inactivity. the addicted person tries harder to fight his or her addiction but the most effective way to resist an addiction is to make room for emptiness in life.

when is the last time you felt empty?
when is the last time you embraced silence?
when is the last time you felt empty?

God's grace shows up in emptiness. God's grace is the only "way" out...

mcmanus thoughts

erwin mcmanus spoke tonight at pts. i admire this servant of Christ because he is free and he lives and leads out of his love for Jesus Christ and his authentic sense of freedom. a couple ideas stayed with me from what he shared tonight. these are probably not the main ideas that he intended to "stick with the audience" but they are the ones that leaped out at me...

1. parable of the talents. Jesus called the one who hid the talent wicked and lazy. why was hiding the talent wicked? using the talent to hire an assassin or a prostitute sounds wicked but hiding it doesn't. the hiding was wicked because he did nothing. most Christians are content with doing nothing. how does God view that? doing anything (or nothing) that keeps you from being who God wants you to be is equivalent burying the talent.

2. participatory does not always mean that everyone is doing everything. something can be participatory for a group if they feel like they are doing the action. for example, including a painter in a worship experience is participatory even though everyone is not painting. each person can feel like they are painting by simply watching and experiencing the creation of the artist.

3. tell a story as if you are experiencing it for the first time. that way, your audience will not think that you know how everything in this world works out and/or fits together. let them experience the story and the suspense with you. don't tell the story from the end's perspective, tell the story from the beginning's perspective.

4. self-denial is not denying who you are as a person. Christians tend to be more Buddhist than Christian. self-denial is denying everything that gets in the way of you being who God wants you to be. do not fall into the thought process that you should avoid your strengths simply because "in our weakness we are strong." aren't we still weak even when we are living out our strong areas?

5. mosaic is not a place where people get fed. when they come, they go away more hungry. most Christians are bulimics, they eat a ton and then go home on sunday night and throw it up and then wait for the next week. Christians do not need to get fed, they need to exercise!

6. Christian discipleship is too standardized (moving toward a standard). uniqueness is key, there is not a standard way to experience God (either in community or individually). the problem with many ethnic churches is they automatically standardize the people to the ethnic background and their ways of doing things. the same applies to any church.

great stuff...

layers of addiction

what role does addiction play in the Christian experience of forgiveness?

i don't have the answer to this question and i do not propose that i am even close. i do want to share some observations regarding addiction and the process of a Christian seeking forgiveness of sin.

one aspect of an addiction is the behavior or substance use relieves stress. without a doubt, a person's sin causes a level of stress. devout Christians sense this stress due to a rupturing of their connection with God and a feeling that they have grieved the Holy Spirit. the movement toward seeking forgiveness through the confession of sin is the right way to address the problem. as Christians, we are to seek the forgiveness of others when we do wrong to them and we are to seek the forgiveness of God when we sin.

for many, including me, the process of humbly coming before God to confess my sins and to experience the renewal of my connection with God is a real experience. the weight of sin is lifted and the distress is removed.

is it possible for me to become addicted to the process of sinning, experiencing sorrow, confessing, experiencing assurance of pardon?
the general application of addiction may not be the best way to approach this possible flow of experiences. a more specific question is an addiction to receiving forgiveness possible for a specific habitual sin where the person finds relief in the confessing/forgiveness cycle?

i have described this as the inhaling and exhaling of the Christian faith. it can become seemingly the way of life, or better put the means of experiencing God, for individuals who consistently sin in the same way. the actual experience of receiving forgiveness is the very source of their knowledge that God exists and is real.

what happens when the person moves away from that sin? will that person know how to experience God apart from that experience?

if not, then i posit that the person is experiencing two layers of addiction. one layer is the obvious addiction to the sinful behavior. the other layer is the addiction to the process of sinning/confessing/receiving forgiveness itself.

am i the only one who sees this?

another country

i have a friend from florida... he needs to get over the fact that he no longer lives in florida

uncontrollable

why are the things that we want to control the most the most uncontrollable?

spacious

the nonaddictive mind is a detached mind

gospel differences - one Jesus or many?

text criticism has long been a stumbling block for many Christians who learn this method for studying the writing of the Bible. many reject all of the ideas of text criticism due to fear while all others embrace all of them due to fear.

i am not writing ideas today to address the whole breadth of text criticism. i do want to mention one idea that i am going to be pursuing going forward.

if the Gospel of Mark was written first and Matthew and Luke use Mark as a source (there is ample evidence for this assumption), then many interpretations of what Matthew and Luke wanted to portray can be determined from seeing the differences in the parallel passages between Mark and their versions. one example is the account of Jesus walking on the water in Mk 6:45-52. the disciples first think that Jesus is a ghost and then Mark writes that they did not understand and their hearts were hardened when Jesus entered the boat. Matthew, however, includes the description of Peter walking on the water and the disciples as worshiping Jesus saying "Truly you are the Son of God" in Matthew 14:22-33.

2-3 years ago, my reaction to these differences would be to say that Matthew and Mark simply recorded different details about the same story. the problem with this response, however, is it does not account for the major difference between the disciples' reaction in the two passages just discussed (hardended hearts versus worship/you are the Son of God).

should these differences be ignored?

an individual who is looking for a quick way to discredit the Bible would point this as an inconsistency in a story about Jesus and, therefore, the written accounts of Jesus are not to be trusted.

is this too simplistic a response?

i would say so. this response is based on the assumption that the gospels are a rigid set of historical accounts that were written in the same exact way as a history book would be written today. there are, without a doubt, historical references in the gospels but was the intention of the authors to write history books or to provide "the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God"? i will write another entry sometime soon on the term 'gospel' and its meaning to the original Greek and Jewish audiences as well as the genre of writing that was for all intents and purposes created by the writer of Mark's gospel when he started the book with the self-description of a gospel.

for now, let's return to the simplistic response of the Biblical critic based on Mk 6:45-52 and Matt 14:22-33. if the genre of writing is not a historical textbook than what light does that shed on the differences between these passages? i have two initial responses to this question. one sees this question as an opportunity while the other sees this question as a major challenge to my faith.

1. i see the differences as an opportunity to see how Mark, Matthew, and Luke viewed Jesus and his disciples. their understanding of Jesus and the disciples comes out in their writing of the their respective gospels. we can get a glimpse into the different audiences of the gospels and the communities that initial received them and formed around them.

2. the jarring question then is what is the real picture of Jesus and the disciples? i cannot escape from this question. were the disciples followers of Jesus who were perplexed and had hardened hearts (Mk 6:45-52) or were they followers of Jesus with great faith, as evidenced by Peter walking on the water, and worshiped Jesus as the Son of God before the crucifixion (Mt 14:22-33)? at this point, i do not have a coherent to response to this question.

again, going back 2-3 years, my response to the differences in the gospel would go something like this, "the gospels were not written, from what i know, when Jesus was alive. the writers were eyewitnesses who later on wrote down what they remembered from Jesus' life and his teachings. the differences are similar to the differences that would come from 4 different people writing about what happened on Sept 11th, 2001. the main event would be the same but the exact details (times, order of events, reactions of people, etc) would be different. just think, can you describe in full what happened from 8 AM to 8 PM on Sept 11th, 2001? grab 4 people, have them write it down, and compare. the bottom line is there was a terrorist attack in NY City, Washington D.C., Pennsylvania (plane downed) with some key events."

this response provides some explanation for the differences in the gospel but it doesn't account for all of them. the walking on water example is one of them.

if anyone actually read this, then i'd love to hear your ideas or comments on this subject.

the scary part of this discussion for me is will i be able to look at Jesus as described in the gospels as 100% the God that i worship or will i have to think "how did the other gospel writers describe Jesus here" and then try to choose or reconcile the description each time...?

initial thoughts on addiction

i was going to pour out some thoughts on addiction that i have gathered from my Addiction & Grace class when i realized that i had already typed up a bunch for the required class journal. here is my first entry that i wrote after reading some initial ideas about addiction in Gerald May's book titled Addiction & Grace:

The initial readings provided a set of very useful preliminary definitions associated with addiction and showed how the paradoxes of addiction are not puzzles that can solved by willpower. Gerald May’s definition of addiction as any compulsive, habitual behavior that limits freedom of human desire redirected my focus away from the object of the addiction to the resulting reduced level of freedom. May addressed the object in his definition of attachment as the process that enslaves desire and creates the state of addiction. The relationship of attachment to addiction opened my eyes to the process.

In addition, the five characteristics of addiction provided a fresh set of criteria for testing whether a behavior is an addiction. Tolerance and withdrawal are two characteristics that I already associated with addictions to alcohol and tobacco. The other three, self-deception, loss of willpower, and distortion of attention were new criteria for me. May’s descriptions resonated with the examples that I encountered with alcoholism.

The main insight that I gained from these initial descriptions is that the paradoxes of addiction clearly exclude a self-willed treatment and point the addicted individual to grace as the only true hope. The result of addictive behavior is shame and the response of the person is to either ignore that shame or to attempt to remedy the shame. May states that one paradox of an addiction is that the addiction enslaves a person with chains of his or her own making but, paradoxically, the chains are beyond that person’s control. Furthermore, the attempts to defeat the addiction feed pride which serves only to deepen the addictive mentality.

The last three characteristics of addiction for me displayed the internal battle that displays this paradox. First, the addicted individual deceives himself or herself due to a series of mixed motivations and contradictory desires. A result from an unclear direction is the addicted person ends up creating more chains of self-deception. Second, a person’s loss of willpower increases with each failed resolution of self-will. Again, the failed attempt to stop the behavior leads a greater sense of helplessness that in turn emboldens the addiction. Finally, the mind tricks associated with addiction capture our ability to love and create a greater gap between where we want to put our affections and where we end up putting them, namely, the addictive behavior. These three characteristics contribute to the first paradox of creating chains beyond a person’s control.

The other paradox is that addictions may be the only real means by which a person can learn to deeply appreciate grace. Grace is a term that many Christians cite when they need an answer to a complex problem. The reality, however, is that most people do not understand grace until they experience its work in their lives. Repeated descriptions of grace are not a substitute for the real encounter with it in real life.

In the case of addictions, person’s pride is attacked and that person is brought to their knees. More specifically, an addiction not only controls a person’s behavior but it also drains the energy that would normally be used to combat the addiction itself. In the case of grace, the person’s ability to accept grace is blocked. Eventually, a person will come to a place where he or she will realize that they are not in control and they not God. This realization exposes that the person is his or her own worst enemy. Grace is able to enter at that point of emptiness. The paradox is that addictions, though they can block grace, are the means by which a person becomes available to that same grace.

limit?

is there a limit to how much a person should study the things of God...? at what point do we start making things up in order to sound important or to explain away the things that are unexplainable?

this is not a license for ignorance but these questions are starting to find their way into my head as i spend more and more time studying the various theories that 'scholars' have posited regarding how we should view the Bible and theologies. i'm starting to wonder if the amount of energy that i am dedicating to wrapping my head around deep theological/philosophical problems is keeping me from using that same energy for simply loving people...

i'm sure i am just venting my frustrations with the amount of schoolwork that i am trying to do but these questions are still floating nonetheless...

AA Meeting

i attended an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting last thursday to fulfill a requirement for my Addiction & Grace class. i was looking forward to the opportunity to witness first-hand an AA meeting. one of the points of contact set up a pre-meeting with some of the organizers and participants. here are some descriptions of what i experienced...

march 3rd - 7 pm (pre-meeting), 8 pm (meeting)

i attended the meeting with four other students from pts. Ben met us at the door and led us into the methodist church where the meeting was held. we spent approximately an hour with Ben and another organizer named Doug.

Ben has been with AA for 27 years and Doug has been with AA for 6 years. Ben is Doug's sponsor. we asked them spontaneous questions. we asked about the religious nature of the 12 steps. Ben responded that the 12 steps focus on the role of spirituality but without any specific religion. his quote was "religion is for figuring out who goes to hell, spirituality is for people who have already been there." Ben and Doug shared that many AA participants do not want to hear about God when they first come through the door because their thought process is "if God was real, then He wouldn't have allowed me to get into this mess or God would have rescued me when I called out to him." the reference to a higher power is not as offensive because they realize that they need help from something beyond themselves.

Ben proceeded to let us know that the black church was one of the last groups to find value in AA because they believed that they could preach people away from alcohol. Ben shared that it was a lack of education that kept the black church from referring people to AA. he shared that there are numerous black churches that now see the value of AA in the recovery process.

Doug then shared about the role of a sponsor. Ben was Doug's sponsor. Ben has a sponsor who has been with AA for over 40 years. Doug is also sponsoring someone who has been with AA for 1 1/2 years. Doug shared that a person starts with AA by attending 90 meetings in 90 days. the sponsor connects with the person and helps them through that time period and beyond as they work on the 12 steps. Doug shared that being a sponsor is also a way to help the one sponsoring because he or she is helping another person. (note: the 12th step includes sharing the experience of AA with others and helping).

the last thing i remember from the pre-meeting is that most, if not all, individuals who show up at AA meetings are not there by their own decision. on the other hand, most are there because they have been ordered by a court or another authority. Ben shared that an alcoholic's ego is so full that he or she would never decide to get help. he said that mostly this was because the self-denial is so high with alcoholism. usually someone else notices the problem and reports the problem.

i wanted to ask Ben about how these individuals are integrated into the AA community if they arrive with such high levels of self-denial and a large ego. we ran out of time in the pre-meeting however.

---

the meeting itself included approximately 30 persons. there was a group from another location. the meeting was called a 'home group' and the other group was another 'home group' who was visiting. the meeting started with announcements of events and welcoming of new members. as expected, each person said "my name is ______, and i am an alcoholic". the group responded with "hi ________". if the person was new they would add "welcome!" there was definitely a sense of openness and shared experiences right from the beginning.

the meeting transitioned from announcements to sharing by the guest group. one person from the guest group stood up and introduced the guest group. he included some words about his experiences but he served more as a moderator. three women shared. i will note some of the ideas or experiences that jumped out to me...

the first woman shared how her love for alcohol started with a family wedding where she ate cake with alcohol on it and then did an elvis impersonation in front of everyone. they all laughed and she realized that she could be entertaining as a result of alcohol. that continued all the way through high school and college. eventually, alcohol became an addiction and she found ways to hide it. eventually, alcohol led to her losing her nursing license and she realized the problem was deeper than she could control. she joined AA and now she finally worked back to getting her license and she is clean. she realizes that one drink will destroy her entire life. she now is engaged and is living again.

the second woman focused a lot on the spiritual aspect of AA and how she refound her faith as a result of AA. she shared that she now wakes up, asks God for help, works hard at the 12 steps all day, and then by God's grace gets through the day without taking a drink. she said that she realizes now how empty she was without her faith.

the third woman shared about how she grew up in a house where the smell of alcohol was as prevalent as the smell of bread in some houses after a person baked bread. she always remembered smelling alcohol. she said that her dad let her drink from a can of beer when she sat on his lap and he played guitar. she shared that she dragged her family from minnesota to new jersey and that her addiction to alcohol increased and increased. she eventually joined AA and she said that she knows that if she takes another drink then she will end up dead. in her words "if i take another drink, then i will end up dead because my body has gone through way too much to handle another run".

overall, there was a consistent sense that taking one drink will destroy the life of the recovering alcoholic. each of the women realized the stakes of the decision. in addition, they saw how the community of AA was integral in them keeping clean of alcohol. the 12 steps, the sharing of stories, the ways to help (sponsor, set up, clean up, etc) all contribute to their staying away from alcohol.

in many ways, there was elements of a 'true' church in the AA meeting.
openness with regards to real problems
community that holds up individuals so they do not fall back into alcohol
sharing of stories of past horrors and recent successes
sharing of 'conversion' stories
sponsor - similar to discipling relationship, generations of sponsors
visiting other 'home groups'
multiple types of meetings - open sharing, learning from books/application of 12 steps
coffee :)

Ben said that the only requirements for starting an AA meeting are a location and a coffee pot...

i was emotionally moved by the experience and i saw how a person who understands the extent of their helplessness is available to help from beyond themselves.

i couldn't help but think that the middle-upper class individual who has enough distractions to medicate his or her life doesn't see the need for any help from God - especially Jesus Christ...