Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Monday, February 27, 2006
Amazing Quote from Bono's Speech
"6,500 Africans are still dying every day of a preventable, treatable disease, for lack of drugs we can buy at any drugstore. This is not about charity, this is about Justice and Equality. Because there's no way we can look at what's happening in Africa and, if we're honest, conclude that deep down, we really accept that Africans are equal to us. Anywhere else in the world, we wouldn't accept it. Look at what happened in South East Asia with the Tsunami. 150, 000 lives lost to that misnomer of all misnomers, "mother nature". In Africa, 150,000 lives are lost every month. A tsunami every month. And it's a completely avoidable catastrophe."
Bono's Speech
Recently I posted a blog entry from Mark Driscoll's blog concerning Bono's speech at the President's National Prayer Breakfast. Some interesting thoughts from an icon of our current culture. To read it in it's entirety, click here. I think it is definitely worth some critical reflection.
XXX Church
My boy, Scooter recently drew my attention to a very interesting website entitled XXX Church. It's actually a pretty amazing ministry. I have not completely thought through all that they do and how they do it, but I commend them for their attempt!
Sunday, February 26, 2006
David Wells on the local church
David Wells makes some very interesting remarks, similar to what I have said in earlier posts, but much better and clearer:
We make a great mistake in thinking that the only thing that counts in the life of a local church is its form. That is, what it looks like and sounds like. Do we have the latest technology? Is our screen big enough? Do we have a food court? Do we meet at times which don‘t get in the way of people enjoying their weekend? Have we eliminated all the things that offend them like pulpits, crosses, hymn books, and pews? Do we have music that is inspirational, contemporary, and makes us feel good? Are our singers professional enough? Is the parking lot larger than we need? Do people leave the church feeling happy like they do when they go back to their hotel rooms from Disneyland? These are all the parts of the gnat with which we are straining while there is a massive camel which we have already swallowed.
So, what is it? The camel is the fact that we have, unbeknownst to us, taken on board ideas that are inimical to biblical faith. What do I mean?
In the West, we are moving ever deeper into a pagan mindset and that mindset is producing our postmodern culture and its public forms. For a church to go along with this set of assumptions in order to get along, and to get along in order to be successful, all too often results in a hybrid which unwittingly embraces pagan elements (such as the way in which the current cultural disposition to be spiritual but not religious is usually being worked out). Is this really what we should be doing? Surely, in what we think and do, in the way we live and act, we should be expressing what the alternative is to our increasingly paganized culture. The issue is far less what we do (do we have drums and PowerPoint or organs and robes?) than in who we are. In our church, we need to be articulating a worldview that has the triune God at the center, which has truth as its directive and sustenance, and which is fleshed out in a joyously countercultural life wherever a moral and intellectual over-againstness is called for. What this means is that in this church we will remain sinners and never become consumers, we will recover a moral view of life in place of the therapeutic view which our postmodern culture palms off on us, we will devote ourselves to what is enduringly right and will reject all forms of relativism, and we will be asking, not what the church can do for us, but what we can do for Christ in the church and in our broken world. It is all about substance, not style; all about who we are as people who are owned by Christ, not so much about what it looks and sounds like. It is about turning our backs on the superficial and trendy and turning our lives toward him who is eternal and enduring. The situation today is that if you really want to see what is superficial and trendy, go and find a successful evangelical church. If you want to see the most artful, pandering practitioners of the therapeutic (what Christina Hoff Summers had in mind in her book, ‘One Nation Under God: How the Helping Culture is Eroding Self-Reliance’) go and find an evangelical church, almost any one, and you will find it, all out in the front, all quite shameless, as if this is what the apostles had in mind when they thought about the meaning of Christian faith! These things should not be. Evangelical churches should be the places where we find an alternative way to thinking about our world and living in it, one which in its profundity is a reflection of the God who is incomparable, not a threadbare mimicry of the culture. We should find an understanding of life that is on the same scale, morally and spiritually, as the life we encounter in the workplace and hear about in the evening news. Today, evangelical churches are more often like little pygmies who are living in a land of giants, always trying to get into their game, pretending that they, too, are giants. They are not. The time for pretense is over; reality is now at hand.
(HT - Between Two Worlds)
We make a great mistake in thinking that the only thing that counts in the life of a local church is its form. That is, what it looks like and sounds like. Do we have the latest technology? Is our screen big enough? Do we have a food court? Do we meet at times which don‘t get in the way of people enjoying their weekend? Have we eliminated all the things that offend them like pulpits, crosses, hymn books, and pews? Do we have music that is inspirational, contemporary, and makes us feel good? Are our singers professional enough? Is the parking lot larger than we need? Do people leave the church feeling happy like they do when they go back to their hotel rooms from Disneyland? These are all the parts of the gnat with which we are straining while there is a massive camel which we have already swallowed.
So, what is it? The camel is the fact that we have, unbeknownst to us, taken on board ideas that are inimical to biblical faith. What do I mean?
In the West, we are moving ever deeper into a pagan mindset and that mindset is producing our postmodern culture and its public forms. For a church to go along with this set of assumptions in order to get along, and to get along in order to be successful, all too often results in a hybrid which unwittingly embraces pagan elements (such as the way in which the current cultural disposition to be spiritual but not religious is usually being worked out). Is this really what we should be doing? Surely, in what we think and do, in the way we live and act, we should be expressing what the alternative is to our increasingly paganized culture. The issue is far less what we do (do we have drums and PowerPoint or organs and robes?) than in who we are. In our church, we need to be articulating a worldview that has the triune God at the center, which has truth as its directive and sustenance, and which is fleshed out in a joyously countercultural life wherever a moral and intellectual over-againstness is called for. What this means is that in this church we will remain sinners and never become consumers, we will recover a moral view of life in place of the therapeutic view which our postmodern culture palms off on us, we will devote ourselves to what is enduringly right and will reject all forms of relativism, and we will be asking, not what the church can do for us, but what we can do for Christ in the church and in our broken world. It is all about substance, not style; all about who we are as people who are owned by Christ, not so much about what it looks and sounds like. It is about turning our backs on the superficial and trendy and turning our lives toward him who is eternal and enduring. The situation today is that if you really want to see what is superficial and trendy, go and find a successful evangelical church. If you want to see the most artful, pandering practitioners of the therapeutic (what Christina Hoff Summers had in mind in her book, ‘One Nation Under God: How the Helping Culture is Eroding Self-Reliance’) go and find an evangelical church, almost any one, and you will find it, all out in the front, all quite shameless, as if this is what the apostles had in mind when they thought about the meaning of Christian faith! These things should not be. Evangelical churches should be the places where we find an alternative way to thinking about our world and living in it, one which in its profundity is a reflection of the God who is incomparable, not a threadbare mimicry of the culture. We should find an understanding of life that is on the same scale, morally and spiritually, as the life we encounter in the workplace and hear about in the evening news. Today, evangelical churches are more often like little pygmies who are living in a land of giants, always trying to get into their game, pretending that they, too, are giants. They are not. The time for pretense is over; reality is now at hand.
(HT - Between Two Worlds)
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Classic Alford
Disclaimer: I deviate today from my usual themes only because I am a die hard Iowa Hawkeye fan.
There has been a firestorm of media hype lately about Steve Alford potentially leaving his coaching position at the University of Iowa as men's basketball coach. This is to the fact that Mike Davis, the current coach at the University of Indiana (Alford's alma mater), will resign at the end of this year. Basically every time Alford come in touch with the press they will not leave it alone. Below is a excerpt from a recent press conference taken from espn.com. I find it rather amusing:
"I have this comment: My entire focus and energy is helping my team win a Big Ten championship and get ready for the NCAA tournament," he said during an Iowa teleconference Friday. "This is my only concern. And you can underline entire and only." Each time the question was broached, albeit in different forms, Alford repeated the mantra, "My entire focus ..." Finally, when asked whether the questioning about Indiana was inappropriate or unfair, he groaned, "You really don't want me to repeat the thing again, do you? I've had to repeat it seven times."
Friday, February 24, 2006
More evidence of Total Depravity
Justin Taylor posts this very disturbing story on his excellent blog.
Are stay at home moms a threat to civilization?
Al Mohler's post today deals with this question. He begins by saying:
"Are stay at home moms a threat to civilization? Those of you who are shocked by this question should take note of the fact that ABC's "Good Morning America" program devoted segments to this question on two successive days, featuring the arguments of Linda Hirshman, a prominent feminist thinker...
In her appearance on "Good Morning America," Hirshman attacked the notion that women can feel fulfilled and validated in the calling of motherhood. As the ABC report indicates, "Hirshman says working is also a matter of feeling fulfilled. She doesn't buy into the arguments of many homemakers who say taking care of the family is the most fulfilling thing they could imagine." Hirshman's response is a demonstration of breathtaking arrogance. "I would like to see a description of their daily lives that substantiates that position," she said. "One of the things I've done working on my book is to read a lot of the diaries online, and their description of their lives does not sound particularly interesting or fulfilling for a complicated person, for a complicated, educated person."
Get that? Hirshman is telling America's moms that their work is fundamentally unimportant, uninteresting, and fundamentally unworthy of any "complicated" and "educated" person."
Al concludes by saying:
"Nevertheless, the best refutation of Hirshman's awful argument is the happiness experienced by so many mothers and the evidence of motherly love and attention in the lives of their children. These women are not "letting down the team." To the contrary, they are holding civilization together where civilization begins--in the home."
"Are stay at home moms a threat to civilization? Those of you who are shocked by this question should take note of the fact that ABC's "Good Morning America" program devoted segments to this question on two successive days, featuring the arguments of Linda Hirshman, a prominent feminist thinker...
In her appearance on "Good Morning America," Hirshman attacked the notion that women can feel fulfilled and validated in the calling of motherhood. As the ABC report indicates, "Hirshman says working is also a matter of feeling fulfilled. She doesn't buy into the arguments of many homemakers who say taking care of the family is the most fulfilling thing they could imagine." Hirshman's response is a demonstration of breathtaking arrogance. "I would like to see a description of their daily lives that substantiates that position," she said. "One of the things I've done working on my book is to read a lot of the diaries online, and their description of their lives does not sound particularly interesting or fulfilling for a complicated person, for a complicated, educated person."
Get that? Hirshman is telling America's moms that their work is fundamentally unimportant, uninteresting, and fundamentally unworthy of any "complicated" and "educated" person."
Al concludes by saying:
"Nevertheless, the best refutation of Hirshman's awful argument is the happiness experienced by so many mothers and the evidence of motherly love and attention in the lives of their children. These women are not "letting down the team." To the contrary, they are holding civilization together where civilization begins--in the home."
Church Full of Secrets
Just a baby, 17, with a baby on the way
She was Daddies little girl, what would he say?
There was an easy way and no one’d ever know
Years later the pain it still grows
Are we a church full of secrets?
All alone in shadowed misery
Are we a church full of secrets?
A shallow smile, and all the while we’re dying underneath
They were married long ago on a cold September day
They never thought the cold would come around to stay
Sitting Sundays in the front and everyone they know them well
Do they know that their marriage is hell?
Are we a church full of secrets?
All alone in shadowed misery
Are we a church full of secrets?
A shallow smile, and all the while we’re dying underneath
When darkness stubbles to the light the healing will come
And judgment has no place for those who’ve been forgiven so much
Empty hands of virtue is all the we bring
So as sinners to the cross we will cling
Sinners to the cross we will cling
Are we a church full of secrets?
All alone in shadowed misery
Are we a church full of secrets?
A shallow smile, and all the while we’re dying underneath
She was Daddies little girl, what would he say?
There was an easy way and no one’d ever know
Years later the pain it still grows
Are we a church full of secrets?
All alone in shadowed misery
Are we a church full of secrets?
A shallow smile, and all the while we’re dying underneath
They were married long ago on a cold September day
They never thought the cold would come around to stay
Sitting Sundays in the front and everyone they know them well
Do they know that their marriage is hell?
Are we a church full of secrets?
All alone in shadowed misery
Are we a church full of secrets?
A shallow smile, and all the while we’re dying underneath
When darkness stubbles to the light the healing will come
And judgment has no place for those who’ve been forgiven so much
Empty hands of virtue is all the we bring
So as sinners to the cross we will cling
Sinners to the cross we will cling
Are we a church full of secrets?
All alone in shadowed misery
Are we a church full of secrets?
A shallow smile, and all the while we’re dying underneath
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Sandra McCracken
I have been on quite a bit of a music kick lately in terms of posts...
Check out Sandra McCracken's latest hymns project. From what I've heard it sounds like great arrangements with great theology and an amazing voice.
Support great music!
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Another great band you have never heard of...
Another great band that you may have never heard of: The Gabe Dixon Band. Great piano stylings, killer vocals and fercious grooves. The website has some live recordings avaliable for free download as MP3s. Must check it out!
Available on iTunes as well as on-line.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Why should the devil have all the good music?
Interesting review of a DVD that poses some great questions about the CCM industry. I have not seen it, but the review was very thought provocing.
Reviewer Josh Hurst notes:
It's a well-known piece of advice: If you don't want to argue, then don't bring up the topics of politics and religion. Steer the conversation into more neutral ground by sticking to less inflammatory subjects. Like family. Or pets. Or movies. Or music.
Unless, of course, the music you listen to is already tightly entwined with politics and religion, as is the case within much of contemporary Christian music—an industry rife with an uncomfortable tension that comes from blending art, faith, and commerce. It's a tension forged from fiery opinions and impassioned worldviews, and it's made church music something that divides just as much as it unifies.
Click here to read the whole thing.
(HT: Blogging All-Star Justin Taylor)
Reviewer Josh Hurst notes:
It's a well-known piece of advice: If you don't want to argue, then don't bring up the topics of politics and religion. Steer the conversation into more neutral ground by sticking to less inflammatory subjects. Like family. Or pets. Or movies. Or music.
Unless, of course, the music you listen to is already tightly entwined with politics and religion, as is the case within much of contemporary Christian music—an industry rife with an uncomfortable tension that comes from blending art, faith, and commerce. It's a tension forged from fiery opinions and impassioned worldviews, and it's made church music something that divides just as much as it unifies.
Click here to read the whole thing.
(HT: Blogging All-Star Justin Taylor)
Monday, February 20, 2006
Together for the Gospel Blog
I don't think I have drawn specific attention to this blog yet. It's well worth bookmarking for frequent reading. It features four of the finest leaders in evangelicalism today and they kick around topics that may be useful for us all. You can find it here.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Covenant Seminary World Wide
I am currently enroled in an MATS (Master of Arts in Theological Studies) at Covenant seminary in St. Louis. Recently they released all of the content of most of the classes for free on the internet. You can listen to all the lectures and read the study guides, etc. A seminary education for free just a click away. What a great resource for lay leaders and teachers in the church!
Friday, February 17, 2006
God doesn't need your guitar on Sunday
relevant |ˈreləvənt| |ˌrɛləvənt| |ˌrɛlɪv(ə)nt|
adjective
closely connected or appropriate to the matter at hand : the candidate's experience is relevant to the job.
When I served in the church as a worship pastor, one of the frequent words that always seemed to come up was the word “relevance”. Probably coming out of the seeker sensitive movement, the idea is that if we can just show unbelievers that we are “relevant” (meaning not boring) then that will give us a platform to then preach the gospel to them.
But what does relevance mean? Relevant to whom? Does this not assume that there is some universal relevance factor that we can tap into and thus reach those outside the walls of the church? I think most churches subtly assume (though not verbally) that drums, guitars, cool lighting, a drama team, and a pastor in jeans is somehow the universal relevance factor. Granted, this may lean a bit more relevant than a pastor in a long flowing robe and worship with a pipe organ, but my contention is that a pastor in a long flowing robe in a church that has not had a paint job in the last 50 years, but knows how to connect people to love God and to love each other, is much more “relevant” than any perfect Willow Creeker with a million dollar technology budget. (that’s not to say that a Willow Creeker can’t lead people to love God and love people…they clearly can)
The problem with all the relevance talk is that a universal expression of relevance in terms of form does not exist. In the past, trends used to change by the decade. Now with the rise of the Internet, trends literally change by the day. To try and keep up with what is "hip" and "relevant" for the sake of bridge building for the gospel is virtually impossible. Here is a novel idea: Why not just try and be yourself? How about the all people in your church just try and be themselves together? Use what God has given you and do that! Don't try and be "relevant", unless what you are good at seems to flow with the next 24-hour period of culture tendency. Just do what you do and do it the best that you can for the sake of God’s glory.
The question is not what forms you use, but who you are. Thus the focus has to be on relationships and not on forms. Is this not the tenure of the Bible? Does not the Bible exhort us to be much more focused on relationships (with him first, others second) than on forms? Through the course of scripture we see that worship forms take lots of different shapes, but what stays central is a call to love God and love others from cover to cover.
I think when I was younger I was much more attracted to the myth of relevance because what that meant for me was that I got to play my guitar in worship. Relevance? Sure! Bring it on! Over the years I have come to see that a valuing of forms holds no weight if there is no substance of God informed passion especially in our preaching and also in our worship leading.
Why am I writing all this? Maybe by now most churches already know this, but I believe that there is way too much emphasis upon forms in our corporate gatherings. What we need is a resurgence of humble, passionate, excellence minded pastors who have a huge view of God and his Word. Where our leaders lead, our people will follow.
What our teachers teach, our people will believe. When our pastors preach huge passion for God and his Word, all these other issues will take care of themselves.
adjective
closely connected or appropriate to the matter at hand : the candidate's experience is relevant to the job.
When I served in the church as a worship pastor, one of the frequent words that always seemed to come up was the word “relevance”. Probably coming out of the seeker sensitive movement, the idea is that if we can just show unbelievers that we are “relevant” (meaning not boring) then that will give us a platform to then preach the gospel to them.
But what does relevance mean? Relevant to whom? Does this not assume that there is some universal relevance factor that we can tap into and thus reach those outside the walls of the church? I think most churches subtly assume (though not verbally) that drums, guitars, cool lighting, a drama team, and a pastor in jeans is somehow the universal relevance factor. Granted, this may lean a bit more relevant than a pastor in a long flowing robe and worship with a pipe organ, but my contention is that a pastor in a long flowing robe in a church that has not had a paint job in the last 50 years, but knows how to connect people to love God and to love each other, is much more “relevant” than any perfect Willow Creeker with a million dollar technology budget. (that’s not to say that a Willow Creeker can’t lead people to love God and love people…they clearly can)
The problem with all the relevance talk is that a universal expression of relevance in terms of form does not exist. In the past, trends used to change by the decade. Now with the rise of the Internet, trends literally change by the day. To try and keep up with what is "hip" and "relevant" for the sake of bridge building for the gospel is virtually impossible. Here is a novel idea: Why not just try and be yourself? How about the all people in your church just try and be themselves together? Use what God has given you and do that! Don't try and be "relevant", unless what you are good at seems to flow with the next 24-hour period of culture tendency. Just do what you do and do it the best that you can for the sake of God’s glory.
The question is not what forms you use, but who you are. Thus the focus has to be on relationships and not on forms. Is this not the tenure of the Bible? Does not the Bible exhort us to be much more focused on relationships (with him first, others second) than on forms? Through the course of scripture we see that worship forms take lots of different shapes, but what stays central is a call to love God and love others from cover to cover.
I think when I was younger I was much more attracted to the myth of relevance because what that meant for me was that I got to play my guitar in worship. Relevance? Sure! Bring it on! Over the years I have come to see that a valuing of forms holds no weight if there is no substance of God informed passion especially in our preaching and also in our worship leading.
Why am I writing all this? Maybe by now most churches already know this, but I believe that there is way too much emphasis upon forms in our corporate gatherings. What we need is a resurgence of humble, passionate, excellence minded pastors who have a huge view of God and his Word. Where our leaders lead, our people will follow.
What our teachers teach, our people will believe. When our pastors preach huge passion for God and his Word, all these other issues will take care of themselves.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Must hear and buy
I know I have been posting about this a lot lately but it needs to be said...
I am going to go out on a limb and say that the new MuteMath album is the coolest thing to come out of Christian music EVER. Go ahead and quote me. Buy it now.
I am going to go out on a limb and say that the new MuteMath album is the coolest thing to come out of Christian music EVER. Go ahead and quote me. Buy it now.
Bono and a Theology of Money
Mark Driscoll, of Mars Hill Community Church in Seattle, has some interesting comments on his blog today.
Come Ye Sinners Poor and Needy
Come all sinners poor and needy, weak and wounded sick and sore
Jesus ready, stands to save you, full of pity, love and power
Come all thirsty come and welcome, God’s free bounty glorify
True belief and true repentance, every grace that brings you nigh
Let not conscience make you linger, nor of fitness fondly dream
All the fitness He requires, is to feel your need of Him
I will rise and go to Jesus, he will embrace me in his arms
In the arms of my dear savior, oh there are ten thousand charms
-Joseph Hart, 1759
Jesus ready, stands to save you, full of pity, love and power
Come all thirsty come and welcome, God’s free bounty glorify
True belief and true repentance, every grace that brings you nigh
Let not conscience make you linger, nor of fitness fondly dream
All the fitness He requires, is to feel your need of Him
I will rise and go to Jesus, he will embrace me in his arms
In the arms of my dear savior, oh there are ten thousand charms
-Joseph Hart, 1759
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
How do you make sense of the Bible?
I think one of the great challenges in our churches today that actually believe the Bible is that a majority of our people are completely Biblically illiterate. How are we supposed to worship God if we don't know anything about what he has revealed about himself? How are we supposed to fulfill the Great Commission and "teach them to obey everything that I have commanded" if we don't have any content concerning what it is we are suppose to teach?
In light of this problem I would like to commend a couple of resources that have and are helping me continue to grow in the area of understanding what the Bible says and how to apply it to my life.
These two books are Getting the Message, and Putting the Truth to Work, by Dr. Dan Doriani.
I am currently working through the second one and am greatly enjoying it. If the Bible is actually God's word to us, then it behooves us to really understand how to interpret it and apply it to our lives. Are we at least attempting to be responsible in this? These two books give us a great start that any layperson can understand.
In light of this problem I would like to commend a couple of resources that have and are helping me continue to grow in the area of understanding what the Bible says and how to apply it to my life.
These two books are Getting the Message, and Putting the Truth to Work, by Dr. Dan Doriani.
I am currently working through the second one and am greatly enjoying it. If the Bible is actually God's word to us, then it behooves us to really understand how to interpret it and apply it to our lives. Are we at least attempting to be responsible in this? These two books give us a great start that any layperson can understand.
Cuddle Puddle
Read Al Mohler's weblog today. Pretty disturbing stuff of whichh we need to be aware. I reminded me of my wife and I's continued need to teach and model healthy sexuality for our children. I only wonder what kind of modeling and teaching most of these young people recieved from their parents.
Al notes:
Missing from this entire picture is any notion that human sexuality is a stewardship to be protected and a gift to be respected, rather than simply a physical capacity to be used in personal experimentation and polymorphous gratification. This is what a world without sexual rules looks like--a giant "cuddle puddle" of sexual experimentation. Can we even imagine the life-long and eternal consequences of the "cuddle puddle?"
Al notes:
Missing from this entire picture is any notion that human sexuality is a stewardship to be protected and a gift to be respected, rather than simply a physical capacity to be used in personal experimentation and polymorphous gratification. This is what a world without sexual rules looks like--a giant "cuddle puddle" of sexual experimentation. Can we even imagine the life-long and eternal consequences of the "cuddle puddle?"
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
A Caution for Leaders and Listeners
Recently I was reading a post from Al Mohler’s weblog, as I have become a fan of his writing. It seems that he is one of the most articulate evangelical Christians alive today concerning the relation of Christians to culture. In his blog entry he made a passing negative comment concerning Willow Creek Community Church in the Chicago area. What struck me about Al’s comment was not so much that he made it, but it caused me to reflect upon the implications of it.
In my early 20’s I was exposed to a great deal of the ministry of Willow Creek church through attending their conferences and services. My time there served to open my eyes to many significant issues in ministry that I take to heart to this day. They do many things very very well as a church and as a global ministry. As I have grown older I have come to see that their style of ministry may have some weaknesses that should be addressed and have been addressed over the last twenty years.
Amazingly gifted leaders, speakers, pastors and authors like Al have a huge audience of influence. Many of these people will listen very uncritically to every word that he says and then promote what they think he is saying, which may or may not be what he really believes. Thus, with the Willow Creek comment, if it is made in passing, the danger is that there is a whole community of people promoting an overly simplistic negative view of the ministry of Willow Creek Church. How does Al really feel about the ministry of Willow Creek? It is probably easy to say that he would not be a big fan, just based upon theological differences alone, but he was not explict in his critique and thus I believe there is a potential danger in this. Now, does Al need to qualtify every negative comment with a four page essay on why he believes what he believes? Certainly not, but I believe that leaders of his magnitude need to carefully consider the implications of their words (as I’m sure he does) upon those who follow them.
Listeners and followers on the other hand, need to really know for sure they have their information straight before they speak for Al or any other leader they are influenced by. It makes Al look very bad if they are wrong, and as Christians I believe that God calls us to do the work of rigorous thought as opposed to just being a “second-hander” when it comes to communicating ideas.
When I was in college there was a huge response in our Christian community to the writing of John Piper. This had many amazing effects and I credit much of it to personal growth that has carried on to this very day. The downside was that there were many people (myself included) who wanted to communicate the intensely heavy theological ideas promoted by Pastor Piper without a deep and thorough understanding of what he was saying. I would have to say that much of this served to cause people who would have otherwise been attracted to John’s ministry, to reject it due to the way that his “followers” attempted to communicate the things that he was saying in his books and sermons, etc. As followers we need to remember that the way in which we communicate is at times just as, if not more, important than the content of that which we are trying to communicate.
All this seems to reflect a reoccurring theme in my blog about listening and understanding before speaking and passing judgments. Listening communicates humility and humility is what God is after in all of his people. No Christian can stand before the cross and not be humbled.
To view Al Mohler's weblog, click here.
In my early 20’s I was exposed to a great deal of the ministry of Willow Creek church through attending their conferences and services. My time there served to open my eyes to many significant issues in ministry that I take to heart to this day. They do many things very very well as a church and as a global ministry. As I have grown older I have come to see that their style of ministry may have some weaknesses that should be addressed and have been addressed over the last twenty years.
Amazingly gifted leaders, speakers, pastors and authors like Al have a huge audience of influence. Many of these people will listen very uncritically to every word that he says and then promote what they think he is saying, which may or may not be what he really believes. Thus, with the Willow Creek comment, if it is made in passing, the danger is that there is a whole community of people promoting an overly simplistic negative view of the ministry of Willow Creek Church. How does Al really feel about the ministry of Willow Creek? It is probably easy to say that he would not be a big fan, just based upon theological differences alone, but he was not explict in his critique and thus I believe there is a potential danger in this. Now, does Al need to qualtify every negative comment with a four page essay on why he believes what he believes? Certainly not, but I believe that leaders of his magnitude need to carefully consider the implications of their words (as I’m sure he does) upon those who follow them.
Listeners and followers on the other hand, need to really know for sure they have their information straight before they speak for Al or any other leader they are influenced by. It makes Al look very bad if they are wrong, and as Christians I believe that God calls us to do the work of rigorous thought as opposed to just being a “second-hander” when it comes to communicating ideas.
When I was in college there was a huge response in our Christian community to the writing of John Piper. This had many amazing effects and I credit much of it to personal growth that has carried on to this very day. The downside was that there were many people (myself included) who wanted to communicate the intensely heavy theological ideas promoted by Pastor Piper without a deep and thorough understanding of what he was saying. I would have to say that much of this served to cause people who would have otherwise been attracted to John’s ministry, to reject it due to the way that his “followers” attempted to communicate the things that he was saying in his books and sermons, etc. As followers we need to remember that the way in which we communicate is at times just as, if not more, important than the content of that which we are trying to communicate.
All this seems to reflect a reoccurring theme in my blog about listening and understanding before speaking and passing judgments. Listening communicates humility and humility is what God is after in all of his people. No Christian can stand before the cross and not be humbled.
To view Al Mohler's weblog, click here.
Monday, February 13, 2006
John Mayer Trio
If you have not checked out The John Mayer Trio, I would greatly encourage it. This boy is scary talented and his bandmates, Steve Jordan on drums and Pino Palladino on bass are two of the best in the world.
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Mark Driscoll in the Seattle Times
Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Community Church in Seattle is now in rotation writing a column for the Seattle Times in the religion section. His most recent column entitled, "Miracle of birth illustrates the way God looks after us", was very encouraging to me as a father. In it he says,
"One of my sons kept lobbying that we name him Soup, while the other argued that we should just call him Dude. My youngest daughter wanted to call him Diego because that is Dora the Explorer's cousin and best friend, and watching Dora on TV is the equivalent of a religious epiphany to her. Finally, after all the waiting and praying, our son was born a couple of weeks ago.
He came out yelling and flailing his arms like a Seahawks fan and proceeded to pee everywhere like a sprinkler. To me, he looked like a Gideon so that is what we chose to name him. He was covered in a pasty white film, which caused his brother to remark that he looked more like a glazed doughnut than a Gideon."
To read the whole article, click here.
Mark will also be one of the feature speakers at Desiring God ministries national conference.
"One of my sons kept lobbying that we name him Soup, while the other argued that we should just call him Dude. My youngest daughter wanted to call him Diego because that is Dora the Explorer's cousin and best friend, and watching Dora on TV is the equivalent of a religious epiphany to her. Finally, after all the waiting and praying, our son was born a couple of weeks ago.
He came out yelling and flailing his arms like a Seahawks fan and proceeded to pee everywhere like a sprinkler. To me, he looked like a Gideon so that is what we chose to name him. He was covered in a pasty white film, which caused his brother to remark that he looked more like a glazed doughnut than a Gideon."
To read the whole article, click here.
Mark will also be one of the feature speakers at Desiring God ministries national conference.
Conversion, Rejoicing and Skepticism
Mark Dever at Together for the Gospell blog notes:
"When people ask me what they can pray for me and our church about, I very often ask for prayer that we would see more conversions. I thank God for the conversions we have seen, but I would like to see more, for God's glory! I'm not, however, a big fan of the big conversion numbers that are reported by some evangelical churches. I don't believe them. I think they discourage real evangelism and true conversions and actually make our towns and cities more difficult places to evangelize."
I have to confess that I have often times felt very guilty when reports of confessions of faith are reported and I find myself in a poised in a posture of skepticism at worst and apathy at best. Is this lack of spiritual sensitivity, hardness of heart, or wisdom? It’s probably a mixture of both. I find myself often holding a, "Let's wait and see" kind of attitude. I truly have no desire to be cynical or jaded so I pray that God would banish those things from my heart, but I just find that I rejoice much more whole-heartedly when I see a new believer take a risk for Jesus a year after their profession of faith than I did at their initial confession of belief. Should I feel guilty about this? Perhaps I meditate too much on the parable of the sower. I am still working this one out. I should probably qualify all of this. It’s not that don’t rejoice when I hear that someone has become a new believer, it’s just that I rejoice much MORE when I see evidence that God is truly doing the work of sanctification work in them. It's easy to say words in the flesh, but it's hard to take up the cross in that same way. Thoughts?
"When people ask me what they can pray for me and our church about, I very often ask for prayer that we would see more conversions. I thank God for the conversions we have seen, but I would like to see more, for God's glory! I'm not, however, a big fan of the big conversion numbers that are reported by some evangelical churches. I don't believe them. I think they discourage real evangelism and true conversions and actually make our towns and cities more difficult places to evangelize."
I have to confess that I have often times felt very guilty when reports of confessions of faith are reported and I find myself in a poised in a posture of skepticism at worst and apathy at best. Is this lack of spiritual sensitivity, hardness of heart, or wisdom? It’s probably a mixture of both. I find myself often holding a, "Let's wait and see" kind of attitude. I truly have no desire to be cynical or jaded so I pray that God would banish those things from my heart, but I just find that I rejoice much more whole-heartedly when I see a new believer take a risk for Jesus a year after their profession of faith than I did at their initial confession of belief. Should I feel guilty about this? Perhaps I meditate too much on the parable of the sower. I am still working this one out. I should probably qualify all of this. It’s not that don’t rejoice when I hear that someone has become a new believer, it’s just that I rejoice much MORE when I see evidence that God is truly doing the work of sanctification work in them. It's easy to say words in the flesh, but it's hard to take up the cross in that same way. Thoughts?
MuteMath New Album
Click here to buy MuteMath's new CD. Word from renowned music critic, Eric Hansen, is that the first full length album from these guys is definately worth the $12. I would highly encourage the support of their art.
Friday, February 10, 2006
Ransom Fellowship
I would like to draw everyone's attention to a very interesting ministry called Ransom Fellowship.
One of their major contributions as ministry is a newsletter entitled "Critique" - I used to recieve this from them, but when we moved, I stopped getting it. I recently stumbled upon it on the web and remembered how interesting it was to me. "Critique" is defined by them as follows:
Critique is a newsletter designed, by God’s grace, to...
...call attention to resources of interest for thinking Christians,
...model Christian discernment, and
...stimulate believers to think biblically about all of life.
Each issue regularly includes movie and book reviews, discernment exercises with discussion questions, book excerpts, poetry, articles on how to understand and live faithfully in the midst of our culture, and much more. Some of the content of Critique eventually ends up on this website, but the only sure way to get our most up-to-date recommendations is to sign up for the newsletter.
A sample of Critique can be found here
I would encourage you to check out the website and bookmark it for some very interesting thinking about Christianity and culture.
Below is an endorsment:
“I am a big fan of Critique. I read lots of Christian magazines and most can quickly be identified as either from the “left” or “right,” and each usually has a strident tone explaining why you should agree with them. But Critique is different. Critique truly encourages conversation and this involves listening. This doesn’t mean it is wishy-washy with respect to truth, but it acknowledges that orthodox Christians can sometimes disagree on issues, and how we disagree is often more important than that we disagree.”
Kevin Offner
InterVarsity Staff, Graduate Students and Faculty
Greater Washington, DC Are
One of their major contributions as ministry is a newsletter entitled "Critique" - I used to recieve this from them, but when we moved, I stopped getting it. I recently stumbled upon it on the web and remembered how interesting it was to me. "Critique" is defined by them as follows:
Critique is a newsletter designed, by God’s grace, to...
...call attention to resources of interest for thinking Christians,
...model Christian discernment, and
...stimulate believers to think biblically about all of life.
Each issue regularly includes movie and book reviews, discernment exercises with discussion questions, book excerpts, poetry, articles on how to understand and live faithfully in the midst of our culture, and much more. Some of the content of Critique eventually ends up on this website, but the only sure way to get our most up-to-date recommendations is to sign up for the newsletter.
A sample of Critique can be found here
I would encourage you to check out the website and bookmark it for some very interesting thinking about Christianity and culture.
Below is an endorsment:
“I am a big fan of Critique. I read lots of Christian magazines and most can quickly be identified as either from the “left” or “right,” and each usually has a strident tone explaining why you should agree with them. But Critique is different. Critique truly encourages conversation and this involves listening. This doesn’t mean it is wishy-washy with respect to truth, but it acknowledges that orthodox Christians can sometimes disagree on issues, and how we disagree is often more important than that we disagree.”
Kevin Offner
InterVarsity Staff, Graduate Students and Faculty
Greater Washington, DC Are
Al Mohler on Worship - Part 3
Al Mohler wisely notes -
One recent writer on worship has commented, "It is not how you worship. It's who you worship." I would argue that the who determines the how. Does that mean that all issues are absolutely simplified and we can turn to scripture and see a specific outline of order for every week's corporate worship? No. Does it mean that there is no diversity and should be no diversity in worship? No. Does it mean that styles will change? Yes. Does it mean that there will be a diversity of styles in worship? Yes. We must make a distinction, however, between style and form. The biblical form must be constantly followed. The biblical pattern must always be honored. There will be different styles, there will be different languages, there will be a different vernacular for each people, and there will be different contexts, but the essential marks of true Christian worship must always be present.
We must not be satisfied with a laissez-faire, cafeteria-style worship combination at our pleasure. There is a biblical pattern that must be followed. Will styles change? Yes. But the worship must always be God directed. Will there be a diversity of styles in worship? Yes, but there must be one glorious purpose following this clear biblical pattern: to measure everything by the norm of scripture, in which God has revealed how He wishes to be worshiped. We must learn from each other in this process that as the people of God we must get this right as we stand before God and under scripture.
To read the third and final installment of his blog series on worship click here
One recent writer on worship has commented, "It is not how you worship. It's who you worship." I would argue that the who determines the how. Does that mean that all issues are absolutely simplified and we can turn to scripture and see a specific outline of order for every week's corporate worship? No. Does it mean that there is no diversity and should be no diversity in worship? No. Does it mean that styles will change? Yes. Does it mean that there will be a diversity of styles in worship? Yes. We must make a distinction, however, between style and form. The biblical form must be constantly followed. The biblical pattern must always be honored. There will be different styles, there will be different languages, there will be a different vernacular for each people, and there will be different contexts, but the essential marks of true Christian worship must always be present.
We must not be satisfied with a laissez-faire, cafeteria-style worship combination at our pleasure. There is a biblical pattern that must be followed. Will styles change? Yes. But the worship must always be God directed. Will there be a diversity of styles in worship? Yes, but there must be one glorious purpose following this clear biblical pattern: to measure everything by the norm of scripture, in which God has revealed how He wishes to be worshiped. We must learn from each other in this process that as the people of God we must get this right as we stand before God and under scripture.
To read the third and final installment of his blog series on worship click here
Thursday, February 09, 2006
MuteMath Review
Click here for a review of the new MuteMath record. Word on the street is that the only way to get it is at one of their live shows. Not sure why they are doing this. I guess you better find out where they are playing live!
God's Terrible Revelation
In recent days through a seminary class and personal Bible study I have been reflecting on God's revelation of himself. In Exodus 19 we see God's revelation of himself at Mt. Sinai to Moses and the people of Israel. What an amazing and frightening scene! Before He manifested himself on the mountain, God made many provisions of protection for the people through his strict guidelines in terms of them approaching the mountain and their corporate consecration of themselves to prepare for the physical revelation of the Lord. There soon after, the people of Israel in effect said to Moses, “Moses, we don’t really want to deal with this God in this way. You can take it from here. We’ll stay back here and you let us know what He has to say for us.” It was a terrible thing for them to come into the real presence of the Lord.
Later on in Exodus 33, Moses asks to see God. God says that he will reveal himself to him, but along with it, there was the provision of protection, for if God was fully revealed, he would be killed. Here is the account from Exodus 33:
Then Moses said to him, "If your Presence does not go with us, do not send us up from here. How will anyone know that you are pleased with me and with your people unless you go with us? What else will distinguish me and your people from all the other people on the face of the earth?" And the LORD said to Moses, "I will do the very thing you have asked, because I am pleased with you and I know you by name." Then Moses said, "Now show me your glory." And the LORD said, "I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the LORD, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live." Then the LORD said, "There is a place near me where you may stand on a rock. When my glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft in the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by. Then I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen."
I wonder if these thoughts about God’s revelation of himself have an application for today?
Recently in a class on preaching that I took from Zack Eswine of Covenant Theological Seminary, he taught us that God’s word is God’s "baby talk". It is not all that he knows, or understands, but it is given to us in love, as much as we can handle and as much as we need, in order to know Him as he wants to be known for us in the flesh of humanity. It's like me holding out a rubber ball to my one-year-old and saying, "Ball, this is a ball. Ball" I could try and describe the chemical composition of rubber and how if you throw it really hard it will bounce really high, or we could talk about angles of reflection when throwing against a wall, but she would not, as a one year old, be able to handle that information. For her, the knowledge of the word, “Ball” is all she can handle and is all that she needs.
There great mysteries in the Bible, things such as how it specifically works that God can cause a willing choice and hold us accountable, or the precise nature of the Godhead as three persons each fully God, but yet one God. Are these ideas and pictures found in scripture concerning God shrouded in mystery simply because if God were to fully reveal how it all specifically works, it would literally blow our minds? Is the fact that there is mystery in scripture really in effect, God’s loving provision of protection for us; his “putting us in a cleft in a rock”?
This should lead us to greater humility as we come to the Bible. We what know is not all that God knows. The Bible teaches that God knows infinitely more than we do. Maybe when we find our home in heaven God will have all of eternity to reveal more and more of himself and teach us all those things that we longed to understand while on earth. He will have an infinite amount of time to show us all of his infinite knowledge. Then, in our resurrected bodies, we won’t need his protection from himself, and all the knowledge won’t “blow our minds”. Can’t wait to get there.
Later on in Exodus 33, Moses asks to see God. God says that he will reveal himself to him, but along with it, there was the provision of protection, for if God was fully revealed, he would be killed. Here is the account from Exodus 33:
Then Moses said to him, "If your Presence does not go with us, do not send us up from here. How will anyone know that you are pleased with me and with your people unless you go with us? What else will distinguish me and your people from all the other people on the face of the earth?" And the LORD said to Moses, "I will do the very thing you have asked, because I am pleased with you and I know you by name." Then Moses said, "Now show me your glory." And the LORD said, "I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the LORD, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live." Then the LORD said, "There is a place near me where you may stand on a rock. When my glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft in the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by. Then I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen."
I wonder if these thoughts about God’s revelation of himself have an application for today?
Recently in a class on preaching that I took from Zack Eswine of Covenant Theological Seminary, he taught us that God’s word is God’s "baby talk". It is not all that he knows, or understands, but it is given to us in love, as much as we can handle and as much as we need, in order to know Him as he wants to be known for us in the flesh of humanity. It's like me holding out a rubber ball to my one-year-old and saying, "Ball, this is a ball. Ball" I could try and describe the chemical composition of rubber and how if you throw it really hard it will bounce really high, or we could talk about angles of reflection when throwing against a wall, but she would not, as a one year old, be able to handle that information. For her, the knowledge of the word, “Ball” is all she can handle and is all that she needs.
There great mysteries in the Bible, things such as how it specifically works that God can cause a willing choice and hold us accountable, or the precise nature of the Godhead as three persons each fully God, but yet one God. Are these ideas and pictures found in scripture concerning God shrouded in mystery simply because if God were to fully reveal how it all specifically works, it would literally blow our minds? Is the fact that there is mystery in scripture really in effect, God’s loving provision of protection for us; his “putting us in a cleft in a rock”?
This should lead us to greater humility as we come to the Bible. We what know is not all that God knows. The Bible teaches that God knows infinitely more than we do. Maybe when we find our home in heaven God will have all of eternity to reveal more and more of himself and teach us all those things that we longed to understand while on earth. He will have an infinite amount of time to show us all of his infinite knowledge. Then, in our resurrected bodies, we won’t need his protection from himself, and all the knowledge won’t “blow our minds”. Can’t wait to get there.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
More PIper on the Danish Cartoon Controversy
Being Mocked: The Essence of Christ’s Work, Not Muhammad’s
February 8, 2006
What we saw this past week in the Islamic demonstrations over the Danish cartoons of Muhammad was another vivid depiction of the difference between Muhammad and Christ, and what it means to follow each. Not all Muslims approve the violence. But a deep lesson remains: The work of Muhammad is based on being honored and the work of Christ is based on being insulted. This produces two very different reactions to mockery.
If Christ had not been insulted, there would be no salvation. This was his saving work: to be insulted and die to rescue sinners from the wrath of God. Already in the Psalms the path of mockery was promised: “All who see me mock me; they make mouths at me; they wag their heads” (Psalm 22:7). “He was despised and rejected by men . . . as one from whom men hide their faces . . . and we esteemed him not” (Isaiah 53:3).
When it actually happened it was worse than expected. “They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, and twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on his head. . . . And kneeling before him, they mocked him, saying, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ And they spit on him” (Matthew 27:28-30). His response to all this was patient endurance. This was the work he came to do. “Like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth” (Isaiah 53:7).
This was not true of Muhammad. And Muslims do not believe it is true of Jesus. Most Muslims have been taught that Jesus was not crucified. One Sunni Muslim writes, “Muslims believe that Allah saved the Messiah from the ignominy of crucifixion.”1 Another adds, “We honor [Jesus] more than you [Christians] do. . . . We refuse to believe that God would permit him to suffer death on the cross.”2 An essential Muslim impulse is to avoid the “ignominy” of the cross.
That’s the most basic difference between Christ and Muhammad and between a Muslim and a follower of Christ. For Christ, enduring the mockery of the cross was the essence of his mission. And for a true follower of Christ enduring suffering patiently for the glory of Christ is the essence of obedience. “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account” (Matthew 5:11). During his life on earth Jesus was called a bastard (John 8:41), a drunkard (Matthew 11:19), a blasphemer (Matthew 26:65), a devil (Matthew 10:25); and he promised his followers the same: “If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household” (Matthew 10:25).
The caricature and mockery of Christ has continued to this day. Martin Scorsese portrayed Jesus in The Last Temptation of Christ as wracked with doubt and beset with sexual lust. Andres Serrano was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts to portray Jesus on a cross sunk in a bottle of urine. The Da Vinci Code portrays Jesus as a mere mortal who married and fathered children.
How should his followers respond? On the one hand, we are grieved and angered. On the other hand, we identify with Christ, and embrace his suffering, and rejoice in our afflictions, and say with the apostle Paul that vengeance belongs to the Lord, let us love our enemies and win them with the gospel. If Christ did his work by being insulted, we must do ours likewise.
When Muhammad was portrayed in twelve cartoons in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the uproar across the Muslim world was intense and sometimes violent. Flags were burned, embassies were torched, and at least one Christian church was stoned. The cartoonists went into hiding in fear for their lives, like Salman Rushdie before them. What does this mean?
It means that a religion with no insulted Savior will not endure insults to win the scoffers. It means that this religion is destined to bear the impossible load of upholding the honor of one who did not die and rise again to make that possible. It means that Jesus Christ is still the only hope of peace with God and peace with man. And it means that his followers must be willing to “share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death” (Philippians 3:10).
http://www.desiringgod.org/library/fresh_words/2006/020806.html
February 8, 2006
What we saw this past week in the Islamic demonstrations over the Danish cartoons of Muhammad was another vivid depiction of the difference between Muhammad and Christ, and what it means to follow each. Not all Muslims approve the violence. But a deep lesson remains: The work of Muhammad is based on being honored and the work of Christ is based on being insulted. This produces two very different reactions to mockery.
If Christ had not been insulted, there would be no salvation. This was his saving work: to be insulted and die to rescue sinners from the wrath of God. Already in the Psalms the path of mockery was promised: “All who see me mock me; they make mouths at me; they wag their heads” (Psalm 22:7). “He was despised and rejected by men . . . as one from whom men hide their faces . . . and we esteemed him not” (Isaiah 53:3).
When it actually happened it was worse than expected. “They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, and twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on his head. . . . And kneeling before him, they mocked him, saying, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ And they spit on him” (Matthew 27:28-30). His response to all this was patient endurance. This was the work he came to do. “Like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth” (Isaiah 53:7).
This was not true of Muhammad. And Muslims do not believe it is true of Jesus. Most Muslims have been taught that Jesus was not crucified. One Sunni Muslim writes, “Muslims believe that Allah saved the Messiah from the ignominy of crucifixion.”1 Another adds, “We honor [Jesus] more than you [Christians] do. . . . We refuse to believe that God would permit him to suffer death on the cross.”2 An essential Muslim impulse is to avoid the “ignominy” of the cross.
That’s the most basic difference between Christ and Muhammad and between a Muslim and a follower of Christ. For Christ, enduring the mockery of the cross was the essence of his mission. And for a true follower of Christ enduring suffering patiently for the glory of Christ is the essence of obedience. “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account” (Matthew 5:11). During his life on earth Jesus was called a bastard (John 8:41), a drunkard (Matthew 11:19), a blasphemer (Matthew 26:65), a devil (Matthew 10:25); and he promised his followers the same: “If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household” (Matthew 10:25).
The caricature and mockery of Christ has continued to this day. Martin Scorsese portrayed Jesus in The Last Temptation of Christ as wracked with doubt and beset with sexual lust. Andres Serrano was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts to portray Jesus on a cross sunk in a bottle of urine. The Da Vinci Code portrays Jesus as a mere mortal who married and fathered children.
How should his followers respond? On the one hand, we are grieved and angered. On the other hand, we identify with Christ, and embrace his suffering, and rejoice in our afflictions, and say with the apostle Paul that vengeance belongs to the Lord, let us love our enemies and win them with the gospel. If Christ did his work by being insulted, we must do ours likewise.
When Muhammad was portrayed in twelve cartoons in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the uproar across the Muslim world was intense and sometimes violent. Flags were burned, embassies were torched, and at least one Christian church was stoned. The cartoonists went into hiding in fear for their lives, like Salman Rushdie before them. What does this mean?
It means that a religion with no insulted Savior will not endure insults to win the scoffers. It means that this religion is destined to bear the impossible load of upholding the honor of one who did not die and rise again to make that possible. It means that Jesus Christ is still the only hope of peace with God and peace with man. And it means that his followers must be willing to “share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death” (Philippians 3:10).
http://www.desiringgod.org/library/fresh_words/2006/020806.html
Mohler on Worship - Part 2
Al Mohler notes in part 2 of his three part series on worship:
I wonder if the vision of the God held by so many who come to worship is anything like what the seraphim are telling us here (Isaiah 6 - my note). Do we worship with the understanding that God is holy and that "the whole earth is full of His glory?" I fear not. I wonder if in our worship we encounter anything like this vision of God. Do those who come to our services of worship come face to face with the reality of God? Or do they go away with a vision of some lesser God, some dehydrated deity? Worship is the people of God gathering together to confess his worthiness, his "worth-ship." How can we do that if we do not make clear who God is? Our very pattern of worship must testify to the character of God.
I wonder if the vision of the God held by so many who come to worship is anything like what the seraphim are telling us here (Isaiah 6 - my note). Do we worship with the understanding that God is holy and that "the whole earth is full of His glory?" I fear not. I wonder if in our worship we encounter anything like this vision of God. Do those who come to our services of worship come face to face with the reality of God? Or do they go away with a vision of some lesser God, some dehydrated deity? Worship is the people of God gathering together to confess his worthiness, his "worth-ship." How can we do that if we do not make clear who God is? Our very pattern of worship must testify to the character of God.
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Down with Barney!!
What is the deal with kid’s music? I don't want to sound an extremely judgmental tone here, but… I guess I will. I think most of it is pretty worthless. I am not trying to alienate myself from a whole myriad of parents who currently own "Barney's Funzone - Volumes 1-10" and currently are playing it in the family minivan, but I just want to ask the question, what would it be like if we exposed our kids to higher art forms, especially music, from the womb on out? Do we somehow think that our kids can't handle these things? Why should we dumb down their artistic tastes?
Is this child abuse? Perhaps, but all I know is that when I play Switchfoot, Coldplay, John Mayer, Willy Porter, Keith Jarret, or Miles Davis in the van, my three year old consistently says, "Dad, I want it loud!", and then he pretends to play his guitar or drums for the duration of the song.
What about spiritual content? I am all for my kids being exposed to great theology in the form of song. I would just much rather have their infusion of great thoughts of God come in a much better package than "Kiddie Praise". Again, my experience tells me that his ability to recite the lyrics from a Chris Tomlin CD is just at keen and he seems to like it just at much as anything that he sees on "Sesame Street".
It's not that my 3-year-old son has never been exposed to music that is more marketed towards children his age; he gets it everyday on the kid's TV programming that we allow him to watch. I would submit that our kids are going to get enough material infused into their brains that is targeted for their age from all the different technological mediums that are out there, why not expose them to forms that have a bit more substance?
All this to say, opinions about music are subjective for sure, but there is a reason that Miles Davis’ “Kind of Blue” has been around for over 50 years now and will probably still be in circulation in another 50 years. I think it would be a fair assumption to conclude that the same can’t be said of, “Barney Sings the Blues”.
Maybe I am just too much of a purist in terms of music and the thought of a Barney CD playing in our family van is about enough to force me to put a gun to my head. Maybe I am an abusive father for not bending to the cultural norms of music for most kids. Or, maybe we could be sowing the seeds of appreciation for art that is much more enduring than the latest song on "The Wiggles".
Could it be that exposure to more long—term artistic forms could be indirectly fostering a future career or at least a fine appreciation that will provide years of joy in listening and appreciation of God’s glory through his creative creatures? Maybe not, but I think it’s worth the effort on my part as a parent.
Would love your thoughts on this issue.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Mohler on Worship - Part 1
Al Mohler has a very interesting entry today on worship at his blog. He is going to post a three part series which I would encourage you to check out.
Muslim Outrage - A Christian Response
Click here to read about the situation.
In response to all this, John Piper notes:
"Am I missing it, or is there an unusual silence in the blogosphere about the Muslim outrage over the cartoons of Mohammed. To me this cries out for the observation that when artists put the crucifix in a flask of urine, Christians were grieved and angered, but no one threatened to kill anyone. Our longing is to convert the blasphemers with the Good News of Christ's death and resurrection, not kill them. Our faith is based on One who was reviled not just in cartoons but in reality and received it patiently for the salvation of the cartoonists. These riots are filled with intimations about the glorious difference between Christ and Mohammed, and between the way of Christ and the way of Islam. And the cowing of the press around the world and the US government is ominous for the fear we are under of Islam--not just extremist Islam. I do not respect the teachings of Islam which when followed devoutly lead to destruction. So I have been pondering which will take me out first, Islam, Uncle Sam, or cancer. No matter, all authority belongs to Jesus. I just want to bear faithful witness to his glorious gospel of peace to the end."
Update from Justin at Between Two Worlds: Some have asked about the source of this quote. It's from a personal email, posted with permission. Yes, you can feel free to post it on your blog, attributing it (of course) to John Piper.
In response to all this, John Piper notes:
"Am I missing it, or is there an unusual silence in the blogosphere about the Muslim outrage over the cartoons of Mohammed. To me this cries out for the observation that when artists put the crucifix in a flask of urine, Christians were grieved and angered, but no one threatened to kill anyone. Our longing is to convert the blasphemers with the Good News of Christ's death and resurrection, not kill them. Our faith is based on One who was reviled not just in cartoons but in reality and received it patiently for the salvation of the cartoonists. These riots are filled with intimations about the glorious difference between Christ and Mohammed, and between the way of Christ and the way of Islam. And the cowing of the press around the world and the US government is ominous for the fear we are under of Islam--not just extremist Islam. I do not respect the teachings of Islam which when followed devoutly lead to destruction. So I have been pondering which will take me out first, Islam, Uncle Sam, or cancer. No matter, all authority belongs to Jesus. I just want to bear faithful witness to his glorious gospel of peace to the end."
Update from Justin at Between Two Worlds: Some have asked about the source of this quote. It's from a personal email, posted with permission. Yes, you can feel free to post it on your blog, attributing it (of course) to John Piper.
Friday, February 03, 2006
Great independent Music
Check out Grassroots Music for some very cool Christian music that you probably won't hear on the radio.
Thursday, February 02, 2006
Love and Listening
James 1:19 - My beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath.
Some reflections on listening:
1. Listening causes us to slow down and take a servants position. It places others needs before our own. Of all the forms of non-verbal communication, listening is one of the most powerful ways to communicate "I love you".
2. All great leaders are great listeners. Think about great leaders you have had in your life. I would bet that you would also find them to be great listeners. Why did you respect them and want to follow them? Probably one of the biggest reasons would be because they communicated "I love you" through listening.
3. Listening may be one of the most powerful, yet underrated approaches to evangelism. Since listening communicates real love, it may be one powerful tool in evangelism. Francais Shaeffer was noted as saying that when we wanted to share the gospel with someone, if he only had an hour, he would love that person enough to listen for 55 minutes of that hour in order to give that person in 5 minutes what they really needed to hear.
4. Listening can defuse and argument very quickly. Often times working in the church, I would have someone approach me with some issue about my guitar being too loud or whatever in terms of the church. If I would just calmly listen to what they had to say and not be defensive and then repeat back what I was hearin them say, by the end of the conversation they were usually saying, "Thank you so much for listening to me and hearing my concerns." I didn't even have to say that I agreed or would make any changes!
Listening is hard. It takes mental work to not rehearse what you want to say while someone else is talking. But people really get the sense that you are listening to them you become attractive and winsome and probably will have a more unrestricted path to the gospel in their lives.
Some reflections on listening:
1. Listening causes us to slow down and take a servants position. It places others needs before our own. Of all the forms of non-verbal communication, listening is one of the most powerful ways to communicate "I love you".
2. All great leaders are great listeners. Think about great leaders you have had in your life. I would bet that you would also find them to be great listeners. Why did you respect them and want to follow them? Probably one of the biggest reasons would be because they communicated "I love you" through listening.
3. Listening may be one of the most powerful, yet underrated approaches to evangelism. Since listening communicates real love, it may be one powerful tool in evangelism. Francais Shaeffer was noted as saying that when we wanted to share the gospel with someone, if he only had an hour, he would love that person enough to listen for 55 minutes of that hour in order to give that person in 5 minutes what they really needed to hear.
4. Listening can defuse and argument very quickly. Often times working in the church, I would have someone approach me with some issue about my guitar being too loud or whatever in terms of the church. If I would just calmly listen to what they had to say and not be defensive and then repeat back what I was hearin them say, by the end of the conversation they were usually saying, "Thank you so much for listening to me and hearing my concerns." I didn't even have to say that I agreed or would make any changes!
Listening is hard. It takes mental work to not rehearse what you want to say while someone else is talking. But people really get the sense that you are listening to them you become attractive and winsome and probably will have a more unrestricted path to the gospel in their lives.
The Bible and Gender Issues
Click here for an amazing free online book by Wayne Grudem, one of the foremost thinkers in evangelicalism concerning complementariansim.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
The End of the Road
Dr. David Calhoun of Covenant Theological Seminary notes:
"The end of the road": are those tragic or happy words? Sometimes, even when the road is good, there is a longing for the end of it. Sometimes, perhaps often, on a long car trip our children ask, "Daddy, how much further? Mommy, when are we going to get there?" And even as we affirm the goodness of life we sometimes ask, "Father, how much longer?"
For the Christian, the words "the end of the road" do not bring fear and uncertainty. Because we know that
finally the path runs not into a tangled wilderness but to the King's own palace in the celestial city. Or, to
think again of Nemerov, it is not a childish hope; it is a "blessed assurance" that at the end of the road there
is a runway. The psalmist wrote, "Surely goodness and love will follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the
house of the Lord forever." What makes the house of the Lord wonderful is the same truth that makes the
journey good: the Lord is there. Boethius, the sixth-century Christian philosopher, put it this way in prayer: "Thou art the journey and the journey's end." Our catechism teaches us that our chief end is to glorify and enjoy God. Then it adds one more word. . . to glorify and enjoy God forever." That "forever" is heaven. St. Augustine, in the last chapter of his massive City of God, dwells for a few moments on the experience of heaven: "There we shall rest and see, see and love, love and praise. Behold what shall be in the end and shall not end." That is the end of the journey.
Read the full article here.
"The end of the road": are those tragic or happy words? Sometimes, even when the road is good, there is a longing for the end of it. Sometimes, perhaps often, on a long car trip our children ask, "Daddy, how much further? Mommy, when are we going to get there?" And even as we affirm the goodness of life we sometimes ask, "Father, how much longer?"
For the Christian, the words "the end of the road" do not bring fear and uncertainty. Because we know that
finally the path runs not into a tangled wilderness but to the King's own palace in the celestial city. Or, to
think again of Nemerov, it is not a childish hope; it is a "blessed assurance" that at the end of the road there
is a runway. The psalmist wrote, "Surely goodness and love will follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the
house of the Lord forever." What makes the house of the Lord wonderful is the same truth that makes the
journey good: the Lord is there. Boethius, the sixth-century Christian philosopher, put it this way in prayer: "Thou art the journey and the journey's end." Our catechism teaches us that our chief end is to glorify and enjoy God. Then it adds one more word. . . to glorify and enjoy God forever." That "forever" is heaven. St. Augustine, in the last chapter of his massive City of God, dwells for a few moments on the experience of heaven: "There we shall rest and see, see and love, love and praise. Behold what shall be in the end and shall not end." That is the end of the journey.
Read the full article here.
Coldplay/Austin City Limits for sale on iTunes
The famed music show on PBS, "Austin City Limits" recently aired an hour special with Coldplay. This video can be downloaded from the iTunes music store for $9.99. I hear it is a must see for all Coldplay fans.
My Problem with Politics
In an earlier post called "Kanye and criticism", I discussed the need to listen and received as much information as possible before making judgments about issues or people. This leads me to a discussion of politics in general. I believe that to live in the USA is an amazing priveledge and I believe that democracy is probbaly the best form of government among all the world political systems, that said, I find myself being fairly skeptical and cynical when it comes to politics.
Is it possible to really make an informed judgment about a certain issue or a certain person without really having the chance to dialogue with them directly about why they voted a certain way on a certain issue, or made a certain statement? Living in a sound byte world means that we need to take great care in coming to conclusion about people and their views, since everything we hear has been edited through various filters before it reaches our ears. That said, I do believe that we can align ourselves with certain people whose beliefs are consistent with Biblical values, for example I would as a rule never vote for a candidate that is pro-abortion. But on issues that are a bit more grey when is comes to what the Bible teaches, (health care, the environment, etc) I think it is very dangerous to assume that we know why a certain candidate believes what he does without having a chance to dialogue with that person or those directly in their sphere of influence. This leads me to my problem: Who gets a chance to sit down and talk with a candidate, or at least have a brief discussion with them? I think this leads me to be thankful, yet apathetic towards our political system. Or maybe I just need to work harder at making contact.
Simply put we don't have all the information about why a certain political candidate votes or speaks in the way that they do. To have our political beliefs about a candidate shaped by an organization (republicans, or democrats) that inherently seeks to discredit the other, in my opinion is not a great way to come to conclusions about candidates or issues. For example, if I sit around and watch Fox News, or CNN exclusively then I am probably going to have my views swayed in a biased way. It would be naive to think otherwise. All this to say, we need real relationships with real people (as opposed to caricatures) to make wise and sound judgments.
The danger lies in believing all the political hype that we constantly ingest. When I get a letter from a certain "Christian" republican organization that clearly does not adequately represent what the other party holds to, I get very jaded and numb to it all. I usually just laugh it off. Both sides just label and characterize the other side. Hype and fear equals dollars which allows the organizations to exist and gives people something to belong to.
The other day I got a piece of mail from a republican organization basically saying that Hillary Clinton is the Anti-Christ. Now I do believe that Hillary holds to some views that are very anti-Bible and I would probably never vote for her, but I got the sense that the intent of the mailing was to scare me into supporting the republican party and to work me into a nice frenzy in order to get my vote. This obviously happens by democrats as well.
When I was much younger I used to think that the republican party was basically a Christian organization. Through discussions with Christians who actually work in this party I have come to know that this is surely not the case. Do a majority of my values concerning, abortion, marriage and family, and other social issues predominately lie with the republicans? Most likely, but to hold to a sweeping assumption that the party on the whole is somehow "Christian" would be horribly incorrect.
Where can real truth be found in politics? I'm not sure there is a great answer here. This probably is just the down side as I see it, to the greatest political system in the world. I would love to hear your thoughts about my evolving thinking on these issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)