Joel's Blog

The View from the Champion's Club

2011-07-24T23:38:00.001-05:00

Beetz and I will be celebrating our 8th wedding anniversary this Tuesday, July 26. That also happens to be the day that we will be leaving for our week long vacation, hindering our ability to celebrate the occasion. So in an attempt to mark the occasion (and, let's face it, to have fun and be treated like a VIP!) I managed to score two tickets to the Champion's Club at Target field.

The Champion's Club is an elite section of seating at Target field that is not available for single game purchase. The only way to sit in the Champion's Club is to buy an entire season package of seats, or to know someone who has. Needless to say, my road to the Champion's Club was through the latter.

My cousin Kirk has a couple sections of seats in the Champion's Club, so a couple months ago I gave him a call and asked if he could hook me up. Much to my surprise and delight, he was able to do so, and at a huge discount from face value, for which I am eternally grateful.

My dad made a trip to the Champion's Club with Kirk last year, and I heard all about the glories brought about by this section of seats: all-inclusive food, service, cushy seats, valet parking, and more. So after that, I knew that the Champion's Club was an experience that I had to have.

I decided to ask Kirk for CC tickets for Betsy's and my 8th anniversary, and to surprise her with the tickets. I made her wear a blindfold in the car on the way to the stadium so she wouldn't know where we were going. When she took the blindfold off and saw the entrance to the club, she said, "No way!" Her reaction was exactly what I was hoping for.

Bottom line: the Champion's Club was a great experience. The food was amazing, the service was second to none (and it was really cool having my car parked by the valet, even if it was a piece of junk compared to the Ferraris and Porches parked nearby), the seats were great (closer than I think I've ever been to the players before), and it was a great time.

Another thing I did for our anniversary was to purchase a score board message, expressing my undying love for the Mrs. Because we all know that nothing is true unless it's plastered on the jumbo-tron. That was pretty neat too, and Beetz really liked it.

A Picture of Repentance and Restoration

2011-07-15T14:03:00.006-05:00

If you don't know who C.J Mahaney is, he's the president of Sovereign Grace Ministries - a network of churches that seeks to plant more churches and bring them to maturity. We sing many of the worship songs produced by Sovereign Grace Music - the worship arm of SGM - at Riverview. Having learned about SGM a few years ago, I have really appreciatee SGM's vision for ministry, their theology, and the way they operate.

This past week a friend told me that Mahaney was stepping down from his role as president due to some issues with personal sin. This took me aback, so I decided to investigate it to learn more. Below is a copy of Mahaney's explanation of events, the reason for his departure (a leave of absence), and his plan for repentance and reconciliation for what he has done. May I have the kind of humility that he expresses here if and when I am confronted for my sin.

Take note of this: the man does not try to justify himself; he does not try to give his side of the story. Rather, he admits that he has sinned, and his utmost desire is to repent and restore the broken relationships that have been caused by his sin, which in my opinion, shows the quality and validity of the man's faith. This is the point of church discipline! It's refreshing (dare I say exciting?) to see it work, and to see the wonderful fruit brought about by it. Take a look at Mahaney's letter below. Also, read about the restoration that took place between Mahaney and someone that he had sinned against here. It's a story of an amazing work of God.

Why I'm Taking a Leave of Absence
By C.J. Mahaney

With a few potential exceptions, I will be taking a break from updating this blog for a while, and I want to share with you the reasons why and entreat you for your prayers while I am on leave.

Over the last few years some former pastors and leaders in Sovereign Grace have made charges against me and informed me about offenses they have with me as well as other leaders in Sovereign Grace. These charges are serious and they have been very grieving to read. These charges are not related to any immorality or financial impropriety, but this doesn’t minimize their serious nature, which include various expressions of pride, unentreatability, deceit, sinful judgment, and hypocrisy.

I believe God is kindly disciplining me through this. I believe I have by the grace of God perceived a degree of my sin, and I have been grieved by my sin and its effects on others. I have had the opportunity to confess my sin to some of those affected in various ways by my sin. And I am so very grateful for their forgiveness. But I want to perceive and confess any and all sin I have committed. Although my experience of conviction has already started—and this is an evidence of God’s mercy—I’m sure there is more for me to perceive and acknowledge. Even with the charges I disagree with it has been beneficial to examine my soul and ask for the observation of others. And I am resolved to take responsibility for my sin and every way my leadership has been deficient, and this would include making any appropriate confessions, public or private. Most importantly I want to please God during this season of examination and evaluation.

So here is what I am going to do. I’ve asked to take a leave of absence in order to give time to considering these charges, examine my heart, and receive the appropriate help from others. With the guidance of the SGM board, I would also hope to pursue reconciliation with former pastors of Sovereign Grace during this leave. I have stepped off the board and I will not be the President of Sovereign Grace Ministries during this period of examination and evaluation. In order for me to receive an objective evaluation in relation to these charges the board is securing the help of a third-party ministry that has no history of relationship with SGM. With counsel from that ministry, the board will determine the appropriate steps I should take going forward. After processing these findings, the board will determine the appropriate steps I should take going forward. This leave of absence will also help remove any impediment to the panel’s exploration that could potentially arise if I remained in my current position, and it will enable me to fully cooperate in the process.

Just so you’ll know, I have also contacted David Powlison and Mark Dever and asked them to review the charges and provide me with their counsel and correction. I have enlisted them to serve me personally during this time and to ensure this process of examining my heart and life is as thorough as possible. And for the past year I have been the recipient of Ken Sande’s correction, counsel and care. That, I am grateful to say, will continue. And as you would expect I will continue to meet with the appropriate men on the board of Sovereign Grace and benefit from their correction, counsel, and care as well. I am deeply moved as I reflect on how rich I am relationally and I am humbled by the time these men are willing to spend serving me and Sovereign Grace.

My friends, I would greatly appreciate your prayers as I continue to walk through this process. Please pray that God would give me the gift of sight where I have been blinded by my sin and others have been adversely affected by my sin. Pray that I will be convicted and experience godly sorrow resulting in reconciliation where necessary and adjustments to my heart and leadership. Thank you for praying in this way for me.

One more thing. For the past 5 years or so I have become increasingly aware of certain deficiencies in my leadership that have contributed to deficiencies in Sovereign Grace Ministries’ structure and governance, the lack of a clear and consistent process of conflict resolution and pastoral evaluation, and the number of former Sovereign Grace pastors who are offended with me/SGM. I have met with some and by God’s grace there has been reconciliation with men like Larry Tomczak (I wish I had recognized and repented of my sin against him years ago). This brings great joy to my soul. In other cases, appeals for mediation have thus far been declined, but I’m hopeful this process will facilitate further reconciliation. But beyond this, there are still issues that need to be addressed and fixed in our family of churches. And I bear a primary responsibility because it has happened on my watch and under my leadership. I have resolved that I and the Sovereign Grace team can’t effectively lead us into the future without evaluating the past, addressing these deficiencies, improving our structure, and as much as possible pursuing reconciliation with former pastors. So during this leave of absence I will not only devote all the appropriate and necessary time to the independent panel and the charges but also to doing what I can to identify where I have failed to lead us effectively in relation to pastoral evaluation and conflict resolution.

My friends, though my soul can be easily overwhelmed as I contemplate my sin and its effects on others, I am also resolved to examine my heart, address the past, and play my role in preparing SGM for a future of planting and serving churches. And given the mercy of God portrayed in the gospel my heart is filled with hope that his good purpose for us will come to pass and cannot be frustrated. I trust there will be much grace to tell you of at the end of this process.

Psalm 128

2011-07-15T00:17:00.000-05:00

Here's the latest psalm I've had the privilege of working with during our Summer of Psalms series at Riverview. It's a loose arrangement of Psalm 128 from the Genevan Psalter. I'm not going to post the recording of this one, because the recording really doesn't do it justice. Kerry Glewwe did a great job singing it, and the band did really well playing the music. Here's the sheet music for the arrangement I came up with if you want to plunk it out on a keyboard, and here's the original version from the psalter.

Church Membership

2011-07-06T12:31:00.000-05:00

Here's a really good article by Matt Chandler on the biblical nature of church membership. What's the big deal about church membership, you may ask? Well, Chandler makes a good case from scripture that church membership exists in order to accomplish the following:

1. Encourage and enable Christians to submit to spiritual authority.
2. Receive spiritual care and encouragement from people in spiritually authoritative positions.
3. Keep each other accountable and restore fallen brothers through church disciplinary procedures.
4. Use church discipline and accountability to keep the church pure and undefiled.
5. Track growth - both physical and spiritual.
6. Creates a means for addressing physical and spiritual concerns within the church.
7. Creates an avenue for providing for and ministering to church members in need.
8. Keeps the body spiritually accountable to one another.

The list could go on quite a bit further, but that's pretty much what Chandler covers. Good stuff. If you're at a church and not a member, join up! It'll be good for you, both as a person and as a follower of Jesus.

Road to the World Series

2011-07-05T14:09:00.000-05:00

Haha. I was putting together the children's bulletin for this week at Riverview and came across this maze. Each week we include a maze in the bulletin which I usually pull off of Google. I trim down any outward components to the maze to make it pretty generic. I got this one, cropped it down, and then realized that there was no solution to the maze. Hence the joke about going through the maze to get the cubs to a world series title. Haha.

Psalm 127

2011-07-04T10:51:00.002-05:00

Here's the latest installment of our Genevan Psalms at Riverview this summer. Actually it's not the latest installment, as we've used two others since my last "Psalms" post. But it's the latest one that I've had an influence on, anyway.

For this Psalm, the idea was to have a men's group sing it. Kerry Glewwe and I worked on some syncopation and parts that deviated a bit from the original, mostly just to jazz the arrangement up and give it some life. Kerry came up with most of the parts. Then we included Eric Moteberg in the mix, and this is how it came out.

Psalm 127 by fatsjoel

We toyed around with a bunch of different ways of singing the psalm: a round, phrase extensions, modulations, etc., but in the end, time constraints forced us to keep it relatively simple. We ended up taking turns with the melody on the first verse, breaking it up into parts for verses 2 and 3, and then going back to the first verse again in unison, but also raising the melody up a step. I'm beginning to get an appreciation for the language of the psalms (ever tried to sing the word "quiver"? It ain't easy!). As is usually the case with live recordings, I thought it sounded better when we sang it than the recording makes it sound, but oh well.

The lyrics are below, and you can compare our arrangement to the original here.

UPDATE: You can also see a video of the rendition here.

Unless the Lord will build the house
It's builders toil in useless pain
The city's keepers watch in vain
Unless the Lord, it's cause espouse
No enterprise shall have success
Unless the Lord decides to bless

'Tis vain to waken in the dark
To start one's daily enterprise
And slave till night to realize
One's sustenance by endless work
For God, his gifts on us, will heap
To his beloved he gives sleep

Lo, sons are precious gifts from him
The body's fruit is his reward
The sons of youth like arrows guard
The man whose quiver's full of them
He shall be mighty in the gate
No foes shall enter his estate

Too Loud

2011-06-26T14:45:00.000-05:00

I really dig this picture.

I took it during the Kaposia Days parade, which goes right down our street. Jamie was on the curb with a bunch of other kids from church, trying to collect as much candy as he could from the people in the parade. At one point, a group of guys on motorcycles came driving by in circles. They were pretty loud, and Ferg seems to have an aversion to even semi-loud noises recently. He thought the motorcycles were cool, but he wasn't much of a fan of the loud exhaust.

Potato Gun

2011-06-25T12:32:00.000-05:00

Grr. This is one of those things I wish they had when I was a kid. Or maybe they did, but if they did I have never seen one before.

I bought two of these today at the Kaposia Days carnival. It's a potato gun. A little hand held piece of plastic that, when shoved into a potato, removes a small piece of the potato as a projectile and uses air pressure to shoot the "small fry" at whom or whatever you wish. I love it. It's incredibly fun and addicting to use. On the walk home from the carnival I just kept shoving it into the potato and shooting it at the kids. They loved it. It doesn't hurt at all, and it's a lot of fun. All one needs to use the thing is a potato, or other hard vegetable (like carrots, although I haven't tried anything but a potato yet). It probably shoots 20 feet or so. I had the whole potato pretty much done by the time we got home.

The Gospel

2011-06-24T01:05:00.004-05:00

Almost (saved)

2011-06-21T22:51:00.003-05:00

I really dig this. The guy's definitely got a way with words, and theology for that matter. It's kind of like Def Comedy Jam: Christian Poetry Style. What? The transcription is below, but you really need to hear him recite the poem to get the full effect.

one of the most dangerous terms in English diction
if it could be translated into audio it would sound like
pbb-bb-bb-bb from the saxophone of Lisa Simpson
two words designed and strategically combined
to form the biggest oxymoron in the history of mankind
ALL-MOST

But see, as far as the world's concerned, you could live your life vile
and could almost get away with murder if you have a nice smile
you could almost meet folks just to almost sleep around
and stop at your local clinic while you almost had a child.

See, "almost" is no stranger to Satan. Here's proof:
he only tells lies when they're almost the truth
and it's amazing in our incompleteness we find complacence
but if almost is one of Lucifer's many traits
then we are inadvertently good Satan impersonations

But on the contrary, Christ did his job fully
and he proved he was God when he died on the cross like it was his duty
and to pardon my iniquities that I commited rudely
he resurrected from the grave just to tell death to excuse me

But excuse me, this is your life and that's something I can't impose on
but your body is God's home which was a loan about to get forclosed on
See, an almost Christian looks right but lives wrong
Can't stand the conviction in Romans so they sit down to be comforted in Psalms

Never understood worship but loved to sing songs like I surrender all. . .MOST
Cuz it's far to expensive for you to spend your life on something that doesn't appeal to your five senses
see, nowadays, Christianity is like a Louis rag--
no function or use but we just rock it cuz it's stylish
not righteous, but right-ish

So now all God sees is a pile of Ishmael's when he intended for Isaac's
and we're moved by how we feel so we're saved when we feel like it
so technically we've never really been saved we merely tried it.
So no wonder why we're never sold out when we return it after we buy it

Now let me break it down because you need to beware
that your life could lack the very standards that need to be there
Cuz on that final day of judgment while God's receiving his heir
will he say, Son, well done or [spits] medium rare!

Because even by worldly standards it would be highly insane
to start spending all of your money days before you almost get paid
like parents, you wouldn't send your kids to a school that's almost safe
and ladies, would you really date a man who claims he's almost straight?

And this is the very thing about God that we all try to get around
but his standards are like between two mountains--no middle ground
so a halfway life is unprofitable to you
cuz after all the Sunday service, Bible studies, and prayer meetings
and everything that goes between, God will say I never knew you

But that's not even the worst part of living your life as neutral
it's that you were once arctic but it is your warmness that is causing him to spew you
and this is the very thing that had me
I was bound and held down by the unforgiving gravity of my spiritual reality
I was a Christian, or at least I portrayed the fantasy

With a filthy personal life but a "God bless you brother, how you doin' sister?" personality
I was a male enveloped by guilt because I was stamped a sinner
I said I was a male enveloped by guilt because I was stamped a sinner
My message couldn't be received because I didn't represent the sender yet I was almost delivered

Till that one day when I totally, absolutely and completely surrendered
I took heed to a modern prophet who proclaimed it was time for change
now I'm no longer bound to sin point-blank off the chain

You can ask Umar Abdul Mutallab, he'll tell you the same--
you don't almost go to jail when you almost blow up a plane
like you don't almost go to hell when you almost get saved

Despised the cross that he was slain and thus the cause for which he came
but don't worry i'm almost done, but before i leave this stage
we have all worked in sin and death was minimum wage
I said we've all worked in sin and death was minimum wage
but if it wasn't for Christ we would have almost got paid

You Can Do Anything You Put Your Mind To

2011-06-20T14:55:00.001-05:00

My dad emailed me this video. Along with the web address he (my dad) said, "'Amazing' and 'inspiring' only begin to describe this guy." That's for sure. It just goes to show that you can do anything you want to do if you want to do it badly enough. It also goes to show that "disabled" and "special needs" are relative terms. Pretty cool. Maybe this dude will come and do my brakes.

Bartholomew

2011-06-15T22:32:00.002-05:00

Our household lost a member today. Bartholomew, our eldest cat, went to wherever cats go when they die. He had been sick for a while now, and it finally got to a point where he just needed to be done. For about the past two months we've noticed that he had slowed down a lot, and was losing weight. At first we just kind of chalked it up to his age, although we've never been sure just how old he was.

But as time went by, we noticed that the weight loss didn't stop, and he was getting skinnier and skinnier, which is significant, because he was a BIG cat. Over the past two weeks he literally became skin and bones. And over the last week, I don't think he was eating or drinking. I tried to give him some milk on Tuesday night (something he would usually kill for), but he showed no interest. He was also having trouble standing up, and his walking was kind of strange too. To top it off, he would lie around in the weirdest places. Last night I found him lying in the kitchen, with his face right up next to the kitchen cupboards. I'm not sure if he knew where he was. He may have been losing his eyesight too. His eyes had sunk very far back into his head. Kind of creepy looking, actually. I asked the vet today what could have caused that, and she said it was probably due to dehydration.

But through all of this, Bartholomew remained in good spirits. He never seemed to be in any pain. He could still walk well enough to get up and down the basement stairs (although his appearances upstairs were few and far between; he had pretty much been living in the basement for the past two months). He even kept purring, even up till the minute he died. Because of all this, we originally decided that we would just let him go naturally. If he wasn't in pain, why not just let nature take its course? Turns out watching something slowly die is not a very pleasant experience.

Earlier this week I was sitting with him late one night, and he just looked haggard. I decided that I would take him in to be put to sleep on Thursday, which is my day off. My plans changed last night, though, as I sat with him again, and he just looked miserable (it was at this time that I became pretty certain his vision was almost gone). I decided to take him in first thing today (Wednesday) and to just let him be done with life. He was ready.

Before I left I took Jamie aside and told him that I was going to take Bartholomew to a special hospital for kitties, and that he wouldn't be coming back. He was going there to die. Jamie looked sad, but said he didn't want to pet Bartholomew or say goodbye. I can understand that. Over the past couple of weeks, since the time that I first told Ferg that Bartholomew was sick, Jamie has wanted to pray for him every night before bed.

We went to the vet at 9:00 this morning and went to the room designated for this kind of thing. Barth and I sat in the room while the doctor got ready. He sat next to me on the couch, purring, while I scratched the underside of his neck, which was his favorite. After a while the doctor came in, and I put Barth on the table. He lied down without any protestation, which was another sign of his deteriorating condition (nobody tells him what to do!). They shaved a bit of hair off the inside of his right hind leg, and slowly injected whatever it is they use to put cats to sleep. He was gone within a minute.

What is affecting me the most about his death was probably the fact that Bartholomew was one of the first things that Beetz and I "did" after getting married. He's about the one thing that has been with us throughout our entire marriage so far. So I wasn't just putting a pet to sleep. I was putting to rest something that's been a part of our lives and marriage for the past seven plus years. It's almost as though Barth symbolized something about our marriage (I know that sounds weird, and maybe even sappy, but that's the best way I can think to describe it).

After Beetz and I got married we decided we wanted a pet, and she had a cousin who was looking to get rid of a cat. So Bartholomew first came to live with us while we were still living with Beetz's parents. I remember that when he first came to our house he ran immediately into our closet and refused to come out. But we were able to lure him out with some Ready-Whip. He liked whipped cream.

Bartholomew's original name was "Meowzer," which neither Beetz nor I cared for. We decided to rename him, and to give him an obscure name. We were going through names one night, and Betsy came up with Bartholomew. It stuck.

We were told that he was "around 7" when we got him back in 2003. He had been with us for almost 8 years, so I guess that made him "around 15." While certainly not overly aged, I guess around 15 is a good run for a cat.

He was famous around our house for his condescending attitude and his propensity to hiss at us. But still, he was a lot of fun. I used to play with him by walking my fingers toward him, which he hated. He would his and bat at my fingers with his paws, and even try to get my hand in some kind of a death grip so he could bite me. I don't know if he was actually annoyed or if he was just having fun with me. I like to think he was having fun. I was.

I was also probably his best friend in the house. He would always want to sit with me, and he'd sit on my lap and then head-butt my chin to get me to pet him. Sometimes it got annoying, but I'd pet him right now if I could. He also enjoyed sleeping on my chest while I was asleep, although I didn't enjoy it at all. I don't know how many times I woke up in the middle of the night with his extremely loud purring literally right in my face.

We gave him the nickname "Barfy" for reasons that you can probably guess. He had a very sensitive stomach, and even though he liked milk and whipped cream so much, his stomach couldn't handle it. He'd puke it up within a few hours. In fact, he puked a lot. Hence the nickname. It was a common occurrence for us to come home from somewhere and find a pile of barf on the floor. Even though we'll miss him, we certainly won't miss his puking!

This is one of the last pictures of Bartholomew that we took, taken probably a few days ago. I wanted to get one last shot of him with the kids before he went.

Since Barth was a long-haired cat he tended to get a lot of knots in his hair. Because of this we actually got him shaved a few times while we had him. They always gave him the "lion cut." This basically means that they shaved everything on him except his mane, his paws, and the tip of his tail. I don't think he liked it much, but it was pretty funny looking.

Bartholomew was also the subject of some of the de-motivational posters I've made over the years.

This one features both of our cats - Bartholomew and Martha. The caption is in reference to a bit of an inside joke between Beetz and I.

Martha is now lying in the middle of the living room floor as I type this. I wonder if she's wondering where Bartholomew is. They were never really buds, but who knows.

Thanks for the memories, Bartholomew.

Psalm 124

2011-06-13T16:00:00.003-05:00

Each summer at Riverview, Pastor Wick preaches on the psalms. This summer he'll be covering Psalms 124-134. After next summer he'll have preached through all 150 psalms. Pretty cool.

Anyway, for this summer's series, I proposed that we somehow integrate the Genevan Psalter into our worship. I found this website a couple years ago (which I've posted about before) which has a lot of info about the Genevan Psalter, and even free recordings of each psalm, as well as the sheet music for each psalm. I've even done some research on the psalter, as well as on Reformation era worship music, so being a nerd, this site was a treasure trove for me.

If you listen to any of the recordings of the psalms, you'll quickly realize that many of the tunes (composed in the 16th century) don't really lend themselves too well to corporate worship. They're actually more of a chant style than anything else. So I figured that if we were to have soloists sing the psalms in our worship services, we'd probably have to do a bit of rearranging.

This past Sunday was the first of our summer psalms series, so I figured I'd put myself out there and be the guinea pig to see if arranging these psalms for solo performances would work out. I think it went well. A recording of my arrangement is below, as well as a recording of the original arrangement from the psalter. I didn't alter any of the words, and I tried to incorporate as much of the original "melody" (if it can be called that) as I could. It's not the greatest recording, considering it was recorded live in church, and I'm not sure what that sound is in the beginning. See what you think.

My arrangement of Psalm 124
Psalm 124 - Credit by fatsjoel

And here's the original version from the Genevan Psalter.

The lyrics of Psalm 124:
Let Israel now say in thankfulness
That if the Lord had not our right maintained
And if the Lord had not with us remained
When cruel men against us rose to strive
We'd surely have been swallowed up alive

Yea when their wrath against us fiercely rose
Then would the tide o'er us have spread its wave
The raging stream would have become our grave
The surging flood, in proudly swelling roll,
Most surely would have overwhelmed us all

Blest be the Lord who made us not their prey
As fromt he fowler's net a bird may flee
So from their broken snare did we go free
Our only help is in God's holy name
He made the earth and all the heav'nly frame

Kerry Glewwe stepped in and added a harmony vocal. My sister Susan was on the violin. I played my acoustic and sang the melody. I don't usually get nervous before I sing/speak/preach anymore, but this time was different. This was the first time I had ever done any finger picking on the guitar while singing at the same time (at least for an audience). So I was a bit nervous. Thankfully the chords weren't too bad, and there weren't any barre chords, so I was able to get through it without too many goof-ups. But to make matters even more uncertain, when I came out onto the platform during Pastor Wick's closing prayer, i noticed that my tuning pedal wasn't on (and if the pedal isn't on, you don't get any sound). It automatically turns on if and when an instrument is plugged into it. A quick check of my cords confirmed that my guitar indeed was plugged in, so the battery must have failed at some point during the sermon. So, while Pastor Wick was closing the sermon in prayer, I quickly turned off my amp, unplugged my guitar from the pedal and went straight into the amp. Thankfully it worked.

Overall, I thought using the psalm added nicely to the worship service, and I look forward to arranging more of the psalms throughout the summer.

The Hypocrisy of Abortion

2011-06-10T09:07:00.000-05:00

Just read this article on abortion. I don't want to say the abortion argument is old or stale, because the fight against the taking of life can never get old. Nevertheless, the arguments are out there, the evidence is out there, but people won't listen. It shows how hypocritically inconsistent our society is. Here are a couple inconsistencies this article pointed out:

1. We say that a woman should have rights over her own body, but we disregard the rights of the unborn child.

2. We charge people with two counts of murder, and we mourn and record to separate deaths in the event of a death or murder of a pregnant mother, but we do not consider the unborn baby to be worthy of life when it comes to abortion.

3. Doctors and scientists are constantly coming up with new ways of treating premature babies in order to save their lives, even when they are extremely early, while we tend to think that the earlier the better when it comes to abortion.

4. The law holds dead beat dads accountable - forcing them to fulfill some of their parental duties, but fathers have no say over whether or not their partner can/should have an abortion.

5. Our society (rightly) condemns racism, yet it seems as though abortion clinics have a significant target market: minorities. A large number of abortion clinics are located in low-income, minority neighborhoods.

At the very least, abortion advocates need to admit to these inconsistencies. How are they explained? Am I misunderstanding them? Is there a reason why we consider unborn babies to be life in some instances and not others? Or are we really just that hypocritical? I think a little honest societal self-examination would reveal that abortion is really just a matter of convenience. Babies take up a lot of time and resources and commitment. So our country is pro-life when it's convenient.

What is the pro-abortion answer to these inconsistencies? I suspect there isn't one.

If You Erase Hell, You Don't Have a Gospel

2011-06-07T11:37:00.001-05:00

Francis Chan has joined the conversation about hell, spurred on by Rob Bell's "Love Wins." In the book, Chan apparently looks at the scriptural view of eternity and "the things we've made up." Take a look at the video introduction that Chan gives. It's pretty good. Chan has said some things in the past that haven't sat well with me, but he's also said a lot of stuff I agree with. Most notably from this short clip, when talking about things like hell or eternity, Chan says that people often say things like, "I could never believe in a God that..." or "My God doesn't..." fill in the blank. Chan notes that when people say things like this, they're actually subverting God's knowledge with their own reasoning. In other words, they're saying that they know better than God (or, as Ray Comfort would say, they've fashioned a god in their own image - one that is acceptable to them). But, like Chan says, God's thoughts are not our thoughts, nor are his ways our ways. So when something like hell doesn't seem to make sense, we need to remember that that's to be expected for a lot of theological topics. God simply doesn't think the way we do (you can read the Relevant Magazine interview with Chan here).

I first heard of Chan's literary endeavors by way of the Huffington Post. John Shore, their religion blogger, wrote this post completely slamming Chan "and his ilk" for their views on hell. Shore says that in reality, all anyone who talks definitively about hell is doing is fear mongering. They're just trying to get their way by using fear. Shore says that most people who reject Christianity do so because of the doctrine of hell - they can't believe in a God that would submit anyone to eternal punishment. Shore further argues (using "flawless logic") that, since Christians can't have certainty on an issue like hell, and since a Christian can be wrong about hell and still go to heaven, and since the doctrine of hell turns of so many would-be believers, then "evangelicals should shut-up about hell."

There are an immensity of flaws in Shore's so-called "flawless logic." First, it assumes that John Shore's understanding of hell is universal. He makes conclusions based on what he believes and applies them to everyone. Admittedly, this is hard to get away from in any argument, considering we all have our own beliefs and think and operate out of them. Even conclusions I draw about hell (as you will see further down this post) are based on my own beliefs (but I think I have good reasons for believing them). So to ever insist that your thinking is "flawless" is arrogant and almost certainly incorrect, to say the least.

Secondly, it presupposes that a person can be wrong about the existence of hell and go to heaven. This is a significant theological presupposition. Can a person not believe in hell and still rightly believe the gospel? My first inclination would be to say that no, a person cannot be truly saved without believing in hell. To not believe in hell and eternal punishment for sin would be to not fully understand the gospel. If Jesus came to earth to die and save sinners from God's wrath and eternal punishment for sin (which, admittedly, is my own theological presupposition, but is one that is shared by orthodoxy and history), then believing in hell is part of believing the gospel. If there's no hell, then why do I even need to be saved? For a better life? For inner peace? Nope. None of those things pan out (using flawless logic, of course). And what do I need to be saved from? Why do I even need a Savior? A little bit of logical thinking through scripture and the logic of the gospel demands that hell be a reality. The gospel doesn't work - nor is it worthy of believing - if there is no hell.

Thirdly, Shore implies that Christians should preach a palatable message to the masses, rather than something that might turn them off. According to Shore, since people are so turned off by the doctrine of hell, we shouldn't say anything about it. Well, the problem with this is that the gospel, by nature, turns people off. Again, I think I have orthodoxy, tradition, and history - let alone scripture - on my side here. Nowhere in the Bible is the gospel described as something that is easy to accept. It essentially tells those who would believe it that they've pretty much been wrong about everything in their life up until now, and that they are worthless sinners, deserving of eternal punishment. Who wants to hear that? That's not much of a warm and fuzzy! The good news though, of course, is that Jesus came and died to take the punishment you deserved so that you could live forever with God. But in order to believe that good news, you first have to admit to and believe the bad news. Believing the gospel takes an inhuman amount of humility, so no, it's not easy to hear, and yes, it absolutely turns people off. But to tweak the message to make it easier to receive is to distort the meaning of it. Yes, people are turned off by hell. That's kind of the point.

Another thing that got me about Shore's article is that it did exactly what so many people criticized conservative evangelicals for when Rob Bell's book came out. There were an incredible amount of Bell supporters that blasted anyone who dared critique Bell, his book, or his ideas before the book actually came out. There were people accusing others of attacking the man without engaging in edifying debate, and not hearing him out before condemning him. Well, it looks like that rule only goes one way, considering Chan's book won't come out until July. Hey liberals: since you're so concerned with hearing people out before they're criticized for their ideas, I'd like John Shore's head on a platter, please. Oh wait, that's not going to happen.

I wish that someone would write a book talking about the essential nature of the doctrine of hell to the overarching message of the gospel. That's what we need to understand. Actually, such a book probably already exists, but it most certainly wasn't written by a hipster in Christian pop culture, so it will therefore get absolutely no attention. That's a shame. But we don't really need Rob Bell, Francis Chan, or anyone else to write a book for us about hell. God already took care of that. Let's read that book and come up with some ideas about hell. What we read should cause us to think seriously about hell. What I like about Chan's approach is that it takes this topic seriously. He says that if there's even a possibility of hell, we've got a lot of thinking and praying to do, which I think is a good suggestion.

Why We Do Family Nights

2011-06-06T10:22:00.000-05:00

Desiring God posted this article from 1983 by John Piper. It's called "Toward a Theology of Church Picnics." In the article, Piper explains some of the theological reasons for getting together as a church outside of regular church hours just for hanging out.

While I didn't articulate them to the church as well as Piper does in this short article, these are the exact reasons why we hold a Family Night ministry at Riverview.

The theme verse for our Family Nights (at least this summer, and perhaps on into the future) is 1 Thessalonians 3.12 - "...and may the Lord make you increase and abound in love for one another and for all..." In my opinion, the only way you can really "increase and abound in love for one another" is if you spend time with people and get to know them. Yes, Sunday mornings offer a bit of this kind of interaction, but not really enough. A lot of the interaction that takes place between people between Sunday School and the service pretty much takes place on the surface.

I think just getting to know each other is a huge part of our ministry at Riverview. The more we know each other, the more we love each other, the more united we become in Christ. So yes, there are some pretty deep theological reasons for having a church picnic.

Everything Dies

2011-06-04T21:02:00.000-05:00

Had an interesting experience today with the Ferguson. Our eldest cat, Bartholomew, made a rare appearance on the main floor of the house this morning. I was getting dressed, and Ferg saw him come into the room. He seemed excited, and he went to play with Bartholomew (which usually tends to be kind of rough), and I said, "Be careful with him, he's sick. He's going to die soon."

While I don't know this for certain, I'm pretty sure that Bartholomew is on his last legs. We've noticed that over the past month or so, he's slowed down a lot. And he's lost a ton of weight. He used to be an absolutely gigantic cat - not just in girth, but in height too. Very lion-like (especially when shaved like this). Now he's just skin and bones. He spends most of his time on a chair in the basement, just taking it easy and sleeping. Other than that, he doesn't appear to be in any pain, and he's in good spirits. He still comes up to me and wants to be petted, and he still purrs like crazy. If he were suffering at all we'd definitely take him to the vet, but for now everything seems to be OK - he's just slowly going down hill, which is to be expected with a cat his age.

Anyway, we have been talking about Barth's impending demise for a few weeks now, even around the kids. We haven't held anything from them. That's why I unabashedly told Ferg, "He's sick. He's going to die soon." It's nothing different than what we've told him the last few weeks. But this morning, something must have clicked in Ferg's head when I said this, because he got an incredibly sad look on his face, and the tears slowly started to fall. I gave him a hug, and then he went to see Mom and give her a hug too. Rather than get into a sin and death talk, we just decided that for now he should know that things eventually die. And we made sure to let him know that this is part of the way God has made the world. Things die (and pretty soon, we'll begin talking about why they die). He seemed to be able to accept that.

Eventually the tears went away, the cat went back down into the basement, and everything was hunky dory again. It's interesting to see how much kids can understand.

Cosmic Treason

2011-06-02T11:02:00.000-05:00

Todd Friel has a great illustration to flesh out the severity of sin. He says that the severity of sin is dependent upon the one against whom the sin is committed, and the consequence for the sin follows likewise. In other words, when one offends someone with very little authority, the consequences are less severe. But when one offends someone of a higher authority, the punishment is greater. His illustration follows thusly:

If I lie to my child, what can he do to me? Nothing. He's a child! If I lie to my wife, what will happen? I might sleep on the couch. If I lie to her again, she might leave me. If I lie to my boss, I could get fired. If I lie to the government, I could go to jail.

In each circumstance, the offense is the same, but the severity of the sin (the level of offense taken) changes based upon whom the sin was committed against.

The same is true with God. We often times will justify "small" sins by saying they are no big deal. When we do this, we put God int he place of our "child." It's not a big deal, and he won't care. And why would he get angry about such a small thing? But what we're missing is who and what God really is: the Creator of the universe and absolute Moral Lawgiver. to him, all sin is detestable and deplorable, no matter what size (or how insignificant we might think it is).

I "like" Desiring God on my Facebook page, and they quite frequently post quotes from several reformed theologians and pastors throughout history. Today's quote from Jonathan Edwards was quite relevant, and I though, profound: “Any sin is more or less heinous depending upon the honor and majesty of the one whom we had offended. Since God is of infinite honor, infinite majesty, and infinite holiness, the slightest sin is of infinite consequence. The slightest sin is nothing less than cosmic treason when we realize against whom we have sinned.”

"Cosmic treason." Wow. When see God for who he is, as Edwards says, "of infinite honor, infinite majesty, and infinite holiness," sin is a big deal. And it shows us all the more how glorious the gospel is. God forgave me of cosmic treason.

A Biblical Model For Marriage?

2011-05-30T21:59:00.001-05:00

A couple weeks ago in one of my seminary classes someone mentioned a "biblical model for marriage" during a class discussion. This ignited some fireworks amongst the students, but especially amongst the teachers (there are two teachers for this class: a main teacher and a co-teacher). In general, I think their sentiment could be summed up by saying they didn't think there was any evidence for a singular "biblical" model for marriage. The co-teacher said that the "biblical model for marriage" that she saw most prevalently in the Bible was one of polygamy. After all, it seems like everyone in the Old Testament had several wives. This doesn't seem to jibe with the modern Christian belief that marriage is between one man and one woman, so how do we explain that (it should be noted that she said this in somewhat of a flippant manner, to show how supposedly ridiculous it is to suggest that the Bible would actually insist on a particular model for marriage, and to ostracize those who would believe that they have discovered it)? The professor stated that "I can't find a biblical model of marriage that I can get excited about." His sentiment was based on the fact that pretty much every time you can see a marriage in the Bible, it's screwed up: David, Solomon, etc.

But I think this line of thinking is, to say the least, really uninformed, not to mention completely fallacious in its attempt to discount the idea that marriage is designed by God to be between one man and one woman, which, to be sure, was the intention of my teacher(s). Especially the bit about polygamy being the supposed biblical model for marriage. Just because polygamy existed - even amongst the Old Testament saints - does not mean that it was a God-ordained model for marriage. God did not give his "rubber stamp" of approval on those who had many wives. In fact, God said that having many wives would lead to sin and difficulty. So just because many, if not most, of the folks in the Old Testament had several wives, it doesn't mean that God condoned their actions. In fact, coupled with what Jesus says, it would seem that a lot of those OT saints were living in perpetual adultery. Just because people practiced polygamy didn't make it God's "design" for marriage, or even OK.

In Matthew 19 Jesus says that Moses allowed the Israelites to divorce their wives because they had hard hearts. In other words, because they were sinful - prideful, lustful, and selfish. Divorce was not God's ideal for marriage, and it still isn't. It was permitted by Moses, however, because the people were hard hearted. So, using my professor's line of thinking, is God OK with divorce because the Israelites practiced it? No. Does the fact that divorce took place in the Bible nullify an ideal biblical design for marriage? Certainly not. To suggest that it does would be ignorant.

I would argue the same for all deviations from what I believe is the God-ordained plan for marriage: one man and one woman, for as long as they both shall live. Anything other than this, while perhaps culturally acceptable (or is made acceptable by a hard-hearted generation) is not the ideal. This would mean that all of the Old Testament saints that had multiple wives were not following God's ideal design for marriage.

This gets interesting when we look to other cultures, however. In some cultures, women are completely dependent upon men for their livelihood. They won't eat or have anywhere to live unless they are married to a man who is able to provide for them. So, when a woman's husband dies, she may be forced to marry her dead husband's brother or some other relative just so she can survive. So in some cultures, polygamy can be used as a means of providing for the needy and showing compassion. Maybe this was part of the reasoning of the Old Testament saints, as well. I don't know.

But I think we can still say that this is not God's ideal for marriage. Yes, widows are being provided and cared for, and yes, it is a cultural system in which polygamy is used almost as a means of compassion. Does that mean it isn't sin? I don't know. God will judge that. But I believe it still stands that this is not what God intended.

When my professor said he couldn't find a biblical model of marriage that he could "get excited about," based on the screwed up marriages of people like David and Solomon, he similarly lacked perspective about marriage and the people involved in it. David didn't screw up his marriage because God's plan for marriage was flawed. David screwed up his marriage because David was a fallen, sinful human being. Solomon didn't take 700 wives and 300 concubines because God's plan for marriage wasn't good enough. Solomon took all those women because Solomon was selfish, prideful, and lustful. In every case where marriage doesn't "work," the problem is not the institution of marriage - it's the sinful, fallen people in the marriage. The fact that people in the Bible screwed up their marriages doesn't prove that God's design for marriage was/is wrong. It only proves that the people in the marriage were sinful people!

We need to also note that for all the ways that people can goof up or not follow God's design for marriage, there are an equal number of ways to bring about forgiveness and restoration to marriage and to the lives of the people involved. There is always hope. There is always the opportunity for repentance and forgiveness. And I would also argue that this is part of the genius of God's design for marriage. When people work through the difficulties in marriage in order to conform it more to what God desires for it, it shows the value of the institution.

I'm not claiming to be an expert on what the Bible says about marriage, and God knows that my own hard heart confounds his ideal for my own marriage. But what I do know for sure is that pointing to the polygamy of the Old Testament as proof that God does not have an ideal model for marriage, or that unsuccessful marriages show that God's design is flawed, are arguments that lack serious historical and biblical perspective.

A Prayer for Memorial Day

2011-05-29T22:43:00.000-05:00

OUR FATHER GOD, as we look back on our nation’s history, we can see that your hand has been upon us and has provided us the blessings of life and liberty. This is no more evident than when we think of those who have given their lives fighting to preserve the freedom that you have given us.

We thank you, O God, that you used the lives of men and women to preserve our freedom – even to the point of death. May we not forget their sacrifice and your goodness.

Thank you, O Lord, for the ones who have died to protect our freedom here. And thank you even more for your kingdom, which can never be threatened by any enemy.

We long for the day of your righteous judgment, when you shall settle disputes among nations, and when swords will be beaten into plowshares, and spears into pruning hooks; when nation will no longer take up the sword against nation, and when we will no longer train for war.

Until then, may we honor the memory of the fallen, and may we live in the light of your mercy. AMEN.

Where Does the Bible Come From, Dad?

2011-05-27T20:54:00.000-05:00

Tonight during our bedtime routine, I was singing the "Matthew 5.8" song from Seeds Family Worship with The Fergeson. I asked him what he thought it meant that, "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." He didn't know what it meant, which didn't surprise me. So we talked about that a bit. Then I told him that "blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God" is something that Jesus tells us in the Bible.

Then he asked, "Where does the Bible come from, Dad?" This caught me a bit off guard, just because it seemed to come out of left field, but I told him that the Bible is God's message to us. He had people write it down so we could read it. "Oh," he said.

Then the next question really caught me off guard: "How is God going to put the Bible in our mailbox?" Huh? In our mailbox? Then it hit me. Earlier tonight I told Jamie that I ordered a new storybook Bible that would be coming in the mail in a few days. He was really excited for it to come so we could read it.

So I told him that we were just waiting for the Bible to arrive at our house but, in a way, God was putting the Bible in our mailbox. No matter how we get it, we get it from God. He seemed OK with that answer. It was pretty cute.

The Strange Tension of Biblical Social Justice

2011-05-26T21:05:00.000-05:00

Social justice is a hot-button issue on Christian university campuses, it seems. In both my experiences at Sioux Falls and Bethel seminaries, it would seem that a deep concern for social justice issues is the trend (and I mean that in the purest sense of the word, unfortunately). In my experience over the last several years, most students' ideas of what social justice is usually translates to liberal politics, or as Phil Johnson puts it (at right):

But a little deeper thought about what social justice looks like in scripture should give us a bit of a different perspective. I've been thinking about this issue for a while, mostly because I am faced with it as the popular trend whenever I go to school. Most of my professors seem to feel that social justice concerns are the primary issue the church is facing right now, and specifically that the church, quite frankly, sucks at it (although I've dispelled this myth here and here). My "deeper thoughts" about this topic have centered around two areas: social justice for the world, and social justice for Christians.

First of all, we can certainly affirm that God values social justice. He does not like oppression or inequality, or poverty, or unfair laws, etc. He values freedom, equality, fairness, and charity. This is observable in scripture in a myriad of ways. In Amos 5 God refuses to receive the sacrifices of his people precisely because the rich were walking on the backs of the poor. There was no fairness, no equality. The rich got richer, and the poor got poorer. So because of this, God basically cuts his people off. In Luke 4 Jesus proclaims that he has come to the world to set the captives free, liberate the oppressed, and bring good news to the poor. Even a cursory glimpse of his life and ministry shows how he reached out and ministered to the least of these. John the Baptist instructs those who participated in his baptism (particularly the tax collectors and Roman soldiers) that one of the main behavior modifications that should be present as a result of their repentance is fairness and equity in their dealings with others. To be sure, social justice issues are big deals to God and his people.

Over and above God's valuing of social justice is his command to his people to pursue social justice causes as well. We are to have the same attitude as Jesus, our example, and stand up for the cause of the oppressed and the captive, and those who have been treated unfairly and unjustly. This is where many of my professors and classmates would say the church has dropped the ball (although, again, this is not true). And the typical belief of these folks is that the government needs to pick up where the church left off.

The interesting thing, when it comes to social justice for believers, however, is that it would seem that it is something that we are not supposed to pursue for ourselves. In other words, scripture seems to say that when we are treated unfairly, or are taken advantage of, or are held in inequality, we are not to try to rectify our situation in the same way that we would for those oppressed people of the world. For example, what would Jesus have me do if I, as his follower, were treated unfairly in some way? Would he have me demand fairness for myself? Would he have me stand up for my rights? That's certainly not what Jesus did when he was "oppressed" (to put it lightly). Instead of standing up for his rights, Jesus suffered. He took what was given to him. He didn't fight to be treated fair, or even with justice, and it seems to me that scripture teaches Christians to not demand justice for themselves.

Why not? I think part of the answer is that our satisfaction - our joy - is not found in justice or fairness for ourselves, or our "rights." Rather, our satisfaction and joy are found in God. Therefore, when our rights are trampled on and when we are treated like garbage, and when the wicked flourish while we waste away, we can remain satisfied, knowing that we belong to God.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus famously says that if a person (presumably one of his followers) is struck on the face, he should offer the other cheek as well. What? You mean he shouldn't confront the guy and say, "What gives you the right to treat me so badly? I'm going to report you to the authorities!" Similarly, Jesus says that if someone demands your robe, you should offer him your tunic as well? "Huh? Why? It's my tunic, for crying out loud! The guy isn't entitled to my robe, let alone my tunic!" Jesus also says that if someone asks you to go with him one mile, go with him two. Jesus said this because there was a Roman law that stated a Roman soldier could legally require anyone to carry his armor for up to one Roman mile. Jesus is saying that instead of demanding your rights be respected, and that the Roman soldier had no right to ask you to take his armor for any distance, instead, submit to him and and suffer. That's pretty radical, and it's part of the counter-cultural-ness of being a follower of Jesus. I would even dare to say that part of being a Christian is sacrificing your rights and gladly putting up with unfairness and inequality.

So there's at least some tension between the kind of justice we are to give others, and the kind we are to demand for ourselves. How do we balance standing up for justice for the oppressed and yet not demand it for ourselves? There's a significant line that needs to be walked that, when crossed, could lead to selfishness and pride. It's also an interesting paradox that fits nicely with Jesus' words about the last being first, and that he who would be great must first be the servant of all. Maybe when it comes to social justice issues, the point is that we put ourselves low by not demanding our rights, while standing up for the rights of others.

I've only just begun thinking about this, so sorry if my thoughts are a bit disjointed and hard to follow! At the least, it's given me something to think about and flesh out further as time goes on.

My Translation of the Beatitudes

2011-05-26T10:30:00.000-05:00

My translation assignment for this week was Matthew 5.1-12, the Beatitudes. Here's a link to the NASB and ESV if you'd like to compare. The more I'm learning about translation, the more interesting it becomes to read the main English translations of scripture to see how and why they translated the text the way they did. I'm still a beginner at translating Greek, but I think I'm getting better.

And having beheld the crowd, he went up into the mountain, and having sat down, his disciples came to him. And having opened his mouth, he taught them, saying, "Blessed are the poor in spirit, because the kingdom of heaven is theirs. Blessed are the ones who are mourning, because they will be encouraged. Blessed are the meek, because they will inherit the earth. Blessed are the ones who are hungering and thirsting for righteousness, because they will be fed. Blessed are the ones who are merciful, because they will be having mercy. Blessed are the clean in heart, because God will appear to them. Blessed are the peacemakers, because they will be called sons of God. Blessed are the ones having been persecuted on account of righteousness, because the kingdom of heaven is of them. You are blessed when they may reproach and persecute you and say all evil against you, having been liars because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because your wage is great in the kingdom of heaven. For thus they persecuted the prophets before you."

A Whirlwind Weekend

2011-05-22T23:47:00.000-05:00

A month or so ago I got an email from Camie Treptau, director of Village Creek Bible Camp, asking if I would be willing to put together a group of guys to come and lead worship at this weekend's Men and Boys retreat. Camie had been asking us to lead worship for this retreat for the past two or three years, and there was always some reason why we weren't able to do it. I asked the guys in the band this year, and everyone was able to go. The only sticking point was that just a few days before I received the email from Camie, Vern Hildebrandt had asked me to preach at the Dakota County Jail for our church's turn in the jail ministry rotation on the same Sunday of the retreat weekend, which I agreed to do. I made preparations for both, however, making sure that the band could cover for me not being there.

So the preparations were made, and Ferg and I headed out for camp on Friday afternoon. Jamie loves the camp, and he usually asks me at least once a week if we can go there. He was really jazzed about being able to go. But this time, he was really whiny ("Are we there yet?"). I encouraged him to just sit back, relax, and try to take a nap, which he did.

Being down at camp was busy. We had zero time to rehearse our sets before we went down to camp, so we spent a significant time rehearsing in the indoor chapel. So coordinating that, while trying to connect to the speaker for the weekend to make sure everything fit together, while trying to manage a three year old was rather taxing. Add onto that that I never sleep well at camp. My body just doesn't like camp beds. So sleep was at a minimum.

On Saturday we got to do some fun camp stuff, and Ferg went nuts, doing all the camp stuff he could do, including the trampoline. At one point he actually said in amazement, "I'm flying!" I like to watch him have fun.

But by Saturday night it was time for us to leave, as I had to be on my way to the Dakota County jail by 8 AM Sunday morning. We left the camp at about 8:40, and got home at around midnight (I drove a little slower because I was overly paranoid about hitting a deer). After unpacking my stuff and getting everything settled at home, it was 1 AM before I went off to bed.

I woke up at 7 AM the next morning and headed to church to unpack my amplifier and guitar and put back the stuff I borrowed from the church for the retreat. Then it was a 25 minute ride to the jail.

I've been to the jail several times, but never to preach. Usually I go along as the musical talent. There are a few songs that we like to sing for and with the inmates, and they seem to really enjoy it. I think they just like something to break up the monotony of prison life. Either way, I think they are blessed by it, so it's well worth the effort.

Doing ministry (or anything, for that matter) at the jail is quite an involved process. As soon as you get there you have to put your ID into a metal box that someone on the other side of dark glass checks, to make sure you're clean. Sometimes the prison guards have even wanted to search our guitar cases and instruments before we are allowed into the jail. But then again, sometimes you move right through as if you were just entering a high school or something. This time it was pretty easy: we just showed our ID's and they brought us right through.

This time our team consisted of three people: myself, Vern Hildebrandt, and Mario Castillo. If you know Vern, you've never really truly seen him in his element until you see him "working" the crowd of prisoners. Vern goes to the jail each Wednesday also, to lead a Bible study. He has an incredible heart for the prisoners.

The jail service takes place in the gymnasium (which is interesting - the Dakota County jail actually feels more like a high school than it does a jail - the doors all look the same, and there are even classrooms down the hallways, and even a gym; but I've never seen the cells where the prisoners stay - maybe I just get to see the good side of jail!). About 80 guys came to "church" today.

The guys show up in different groups, depending on their security level, and by the time we were supposed to start, one of the guards informed us that one of the groups had gotten held up in the medical wing - guys were still getting their meds and would be late to the service. He asked us if we just wanted to start anyway, or wait for them. Vern said we should wait for them, and he asked me what we could do to kill some time. I grabbed my guitar and asked if anybody there liked bluesy, gospel music, to which most of them replied positively. So I was able to teach them one of the songs my band does, "Walk With Me." They loved it. They sang along great. It was a lot of fun. Then I sang "Precious Lord, Take My Hand" for them too, which I think they liked.

After we started Mario Castillo gave his testimony. Mario also has a great heart for ministry to the prisoners, and he has a powerful testimony of how God has worked in his life. Mario has some good ministry ahead of him.

Then I got to preach. I must confess that as I was preparing what I was going to say earlier in the week, I was a little nervous. What does one say to a group of 80 prisoners? Most of these guys are pretty hard looking, and have been around the block a few times to say the least. I pretty much couldn't have less in common with them! I concluded that the most important thing was to just be myself, and not try to be someone/thing I wasn't, and to just deliver the gospel as I knew it.

The Gideons have supplied all the prisoners with Bibles, but most of the guys are completely unfamiliar with scripture, so I made sure to have page numbers ready for them to look up the passages I was talking about. And then I just basically gave them the law and the gospel, by way of the Romans Road. I have no idea if anything got through to them, but I suppose that's why I leave God to do the work. I can only pray that they will repent and believe, just like I'd pray for anyone else who's ever heard the gospel.

Our time was over by 9:45 and the men all went back to their cells while Vern, Mario and I hoofed it back to WSP to make it to church before the service started. I came into the service completely unprepared - nothing ready for announcements, and I totally forgot to tell the worship team about my absence from rehearsal. But everything went smoothly, which was nice.

By the time I got home from lunch, I could barely keep my eyes open. I hadn't fully recovered from the lack of sleep and energy expended at camp, and I was coming off a totally new experience of preaching at the jail. I was wiped. By 2:00 I was dead to the world on our living room couch. Two hours later I awoke, having slept more soundly than I had even the previous night.

And now I'm writing this post, having completed a couple hours of homework that is due this week. It was a busy and fun weekend, but I'm not sure I could do it all the time. Oh well. It was worth it.

Interesting

2011-05-19T18:06:00.000-05:00

We translated Matthew 18 for Greek class tonight, and an issue arose that I was previously unaware of. In Matthew 18 Peter asks Jesus how many times he is to forgive his brother. Peter seems to suggest that forgiving his brother, 7 times at the most, would be adequate. Jesus responds by saying in verse 22: "I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven." (ESV)

The most common interpretation of this verse is that Christians are to forgive those who wrong them 490 times before they hold a brother's offense against them. The point that Jesus is making is that Christians are to forgive their brothers always. He uses a big number to communicate the fact that forgiveness is supposed to be the standard, not holding a grudge or taking revenge. Jesus was most definitely not saying that Christians should have a checklist and count the number of times that Christians forgive their brothers and sisters until they've reached 490. He's being overly dramatic. Because if you're counting the number of times you've forgiven someone, you haven't really forgiven.

The trick is that, in Greek, there is no way of expressing multiplication. The Greek in verse 22 literally reads "hebdomékontakis hepta." The first word means "seventy times" and the second word means "seven." In all other places where numbers are communicated in New Testament Greek, numbers in multiples of ten are communicated by saying "seventy and seven," which seems to be the case here. So the translation, "seventy times seven" (as in multiplication) is most likely not accurate. Rather, Jesus probably meant "seventy and (plus) seven" giving us a total of 77 times that a Christian should forgive his brothers.

Here's how some modern translations render the verse:

NIV: Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.

NASB: Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.

ESV: Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.

KJV: Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

TNIV: Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.

77 is a lot less than 490, but Jesus' point is the same: how many times should I forgive my brother? Answer: a lot of times. In fact, don't stop. Always forgive.

Even So, Come Lord Jesus

2011-05-05T20:48:00.000-05:00

Pastor Wick and I once joked that the only people on earth who don't want Jesus to come back (aside from people who aren't Christians) are seminarians: we've invested so much into this educational process that we can't fathom not being able to complete it and use it in the ministerial world. While it's obviously tongue in cheek, there's some truth there. Seminary is a lot of work, and sometimes that work entails sitting in your seat, keeping your mouth shut, and putting up with the ridiculous crap you hear from your profs.

(Aside: as I typed that last sentence, the prof for this class just said, "I can't find a biblical model of marriage that I can get excited about.")

Well, I can safely say that I am once again looking forward to the return of Christ. In fact, if he would come back before I have to go to this ridiculous "Self in Community" class again next Thursday, that would be ideal.

So here's a prayer request: Lord, please come back for the sake of your glory (and my sanity), if at all possible, before 8:00 PM next Thursday. Amen.

A No Hitter!

2011-05-03T22:58:00.000-05:00

Got to hear baseball history on the radio tonight. Francisco Liriano tossed a no-hitter against the hated Chicago White Sox.

I left Greek class at 6:58 tonight and got to my car by the time they announced the starting lineups. The Twins haven't been doing too well this year, and Liriano has been struggling in particular, so needless to say, I wasn't expecting much at the start of the game. After the Twins failed to do anything in the first inning, I remember being disgusted when Liriano walked the first White Sox hitter he faced. "Here we go," I thought to myself, expecting the White Sox to break it open in the first inning (as Liriano has been having a hard time not giving up runs in the first so far this year).

When I got home, the fam was playing out in the yard. I turned on the radio in the garage and left the door open so we could hear the game as we played. Beetz and I played catch while the kids went down the slide and played in the sandbox. By this time, Jason Kubel had hit a solo home run in the fourth inning to make it a 1-0 game. This would turn out to be the winning run.

I took a break from the game to put the kids to bed. We sang some songs and read some books, and then it was bed time. After this, I got my laundry ready and went downstairs to put it in the wash and to take a shower. A couple years ago I bought myself a small radio that I could listen to in the basement while I was working or doing whatever. I brought the radio into the bathroom with me and listened to the game while I showered.

After a shower and a shave, Liriano had made it through 6 innings without allowing a hit. I went upstairs to find the Mrs. watching "The Voice," so I picked up my computer and "watched" the game on mlb.com. One new feature they have on their "gameday" presentation is brief live video looks (which is really cool for those of us who don't have the option of watching the Twins games on TV). With two outs in the 7th inning they gave a live look into the game and I got to see Danny Valencia make an incredible play at third base to save the no-hitter. It was fantastic.

I told the Mrs. that if Liriano kept the no-no on into the ninth, we were turning the TV off and the radio on. She agreed. I called friends and family to make sure they were tuned in to potentially witness history.

The ninth inning came, and mlb.com broke into the video of the game live, so I got to both watch the ninth inning and hear Gordo call it (man, I'm going to miss him when he's gone). Gordo called the third out thusly, "And a liner right to Tolbert at short! He's done it! Liriano has done it! He has a no-hitter!" It was awesome.

The Twins are really stinking it up this year, but that's OK. I just love baseball. And to be able to see this was really cool.

My Thoughts on bin Laden's Death

2011-05-02T22:12:00.005-05:00

Lots of posts on Facebook about the death of Osama bin Laden yesterday and today. Last night when the news broke, I don't think there was even one status update on my wall that didn't address the bin Laden situation. Most people expressed joy and elation when they heard that bin Laden had been killed. There was a lot of talk about how it had been a long time coming.

My own reaction was initially one of surprise. When I saw the flasher at the bottom of the TV screen (interrupting Celebrity Apprentice!) indicating that a special announcement from the president was coming up, I had no idea what it was. When I learned that bin Laden had been killed, I was initially really surprised. I didn't expect that to be the announcement.

My second reaction was one of gladness. I was glad that he was dead. I was glad that his reign of terror, so to speak, was over (although it will no doubt be carried on by countless thousands), and that lives will no doubt be spared as a result of his demise.

Some of my friends on Facebook posted scripture. I saw Proverbs 24.17-18 quoted a few times: "Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and let not your heart be glad when he stumbles, lest the LORD see it and be displeased, and turn away his anger from him." My pastor quoted Matthew 26.52: "...all who take the sword will perish by the sword."

All this got me thinking about how a Christian should respond to the death of a wicked person, such as Osama bin Laden. Should we rejoice? Should we be sorrowful? Should we say, "It's about time"? I don't think it's as simple as Proverbs 24.17-18. We need more theology than just what those verses offer in order to formulate a right response to the death of a wicked man like Osama bin Laden.

Then I stumbled on these two excellent pieces, one by John Piper, and one by Justin Holcomb of Mars Hill, Seattle. Both pieces masterfully bring out excellent biblical points on how God views the death of the wicked and how Christians should view the death of the wicked. I highly recommend them.

So how should a Christian respond to the death of Osama bin Laden? Here's what I think:

1) We should praise God that we haven't suffered the same fate. I mean this both in the physical and spiritual senses. I am every bit just as evil as Osama bin Laden. My heart was just as rotten, I had the same potential for unspeakable evil, and I deserved the same fate. But by God's grace, I did not fall into such wickedness, and, also by God's grace, I have been forgiven of my sin. Christ took for me the punishment that Osama bin Laden is experiencing at this very moment. So let's praise God that he extends grace to those who will receive it, and that he extends mercy.

2) We should long for the salvation of those who do not believe. The thought of anyone entering the eternal torment of hell should scare us. I don't want anyone to go to hell - not even Osama bin Laden. God is not willing that any should perish, but that all come to repentance and faith, and that includes bin Laden. But all those who do not come to faith will be judged. That alone should fuel our preaching endeavors.

3) We should be glad that God's justice and righteousness have been served. In sovereignly ordaining the death and judgment of bin Laden, God exercises his justice and righteousness. He punishes evil where it is found. He shows no favoritism. He remains faithful and true to who he is. This is good news.

4) We should be glad that God has removed such evil from the world. The Bible is full of examples of how God removes (or kills) people who are exceedingly wicked from their position, or even their life. Such removal can allow peace and justice to flourish. Let's pray that's the case with bin Laden's death.

5) We should not be glad that bin Laden is in hell (see #2).

6) We should not feel that bin Laden is getting what he deserves without remembering why we have not gotten what we deserved (see #1). Such thinking would be, I believe, judgmental and sinful.

7) We should not think that God vindictively killed bin Laden (see #3). God works within his justice and righteousness, not out of spite or vindictiveness.

Atheist Chaplains

2011-05-01T15:54:00.001-05:00

Would you ever go to an atheist for spiritual council? Probably not. That, however, is what several atheists would like to see happen in the military.

This article reports that several atheists are lobbying to have atheist chaplains in the military to offer support to atheist troops. But, from what I understand, military chaplains don't necessarily counsel soldiers in their particular faith, but in the professed faith of the soldier seeking counseling. So how could an atheist chaplain council someone in his or her faith, if said atheist chaplain had no faith whatsoever? If it sounds like it doesn't make much sense, it doesn't.

The article goes on to say that the atheists want atheist chaplains in order to "win official acceptance in the military." The only problem with that is that atheists already have official acceptance in the military. How don't they? They aren't discriminated against for their lack of faith. Nor are they prohibited from any type of military service in any way as a result of their lack of faith.

What's really behind this is that the existence of atheist chaplains will allow atheist groups to be able to publicly promote their beliefs (or lack of beliefs) and distribute literature. So it has nothing to do with faith (obviously) but more of an abuse of the chaplaincy, if you ask me. If you just want to be a chaplain to get yourself out there, you shouldn't be a chaplain.

But what's interesting about this is that if atheists truly feel the need to promote their worldviews (and counsel those who adhere to them within the context of such a worldview) then their views, it seems to me, must be identified as a faith group. Any and all worldview of faith system is guided by principles of belief and not fact, making every worldview a matter of faith. And certainly atheists hold beliefs that others don't, even if they are beliefs that state that beliefs are useless and ignorant (and they are beliefs, and don't let anyone tell you different), so what they think and believe is unique to itself, making it a matter of faith. So if atheists want to be chaplains in order to promote their beliefs and to counsel fellow atheists, go for it. They just have to admit that their supposedly faithless way of seeing the world is actually brimming over with faith (just faith in nothing).

One Step Closer

2011-04-30T23:29:00.001-05:00

A while ago I posted about how PETA wants an animal-gender-inclusive translation of the Bible. They would prefer that animals mentioned in scripture be referred to as "he" or "she" rather than "it." They feel that animals aren't "its," and personal pronouns communicate their individuality and personhood, I guess.

I also said that Phil Johnson predicted (somewhat tongue in cheek) that such a translation of the Bible would, in fact, come down the pike at some point in time in the future. Today we are one step closer to such a translation, or at least the kind of thinking that would bring about such a translation has moved from being held just amongst the PETA folks. It's now moved to the academy, and specifically, to the theological academy.

Professor Andrew Linsey believes that calling animals "pets" is insulting to the animal, and that even referring to animals as "wildlife" is demeaning. Instead, pets should be known as "companion animals," and wild animals should be referred to as "free-living" animals. And those people who own animals shall henceforth be known as "human carers."

Ugh. Here it comes.

Read the whole article here. It's embarrassing. How does this guy have a job?

That's Funny, Dad.

2011-04-22T16:32:00.000-05:00

A few days ago Ferg, the Hanburger, and I were playing out in the yard. Han got up on the swing set, and Ferg tried to follow by going up the slide. He fell down half way up and slid back down, which Han thought was hilarious. She started cracking up, so I went and got the camera.

Halfway through she notices that I'm holding a camera and says, "Cheese," as though I were taking a picture. I guess she hasn't wrapped her mind around video yet.

I Follow Jesus Holy Truth Church

2011-04-15T16:21:00.000-05:00

My dad alerted me today to a half-page advertisement in Thursday's Pioneer Press for the "I Follow Jesus Holy Truth Church." Yes, that's what it's called. I'm not sure why. It's definitely one of the more interesting church names I've ever heard.

The advertisement is riddled with grammatical and spelling errors, not to mention several items which point to the shaky theology of the leadership of the I Follow Jesus Holy Truth Church. The wording and phrasing of the ad is so bad, in fact, that it makes me think it was translated from another language into English for the purposes of the ad. Since these folks probably paid upwards of $5,000 for this ad, I hope for their sake that's the case. Here's the content of the ad (note: all of the bad grammar and spelling belong to the ad, not to me):

Dear Friend in Christ,

A new church is about to open in the Whittier neighborhood. Its success mainly depends on the hearts of those who want to make something really positive and powerfully wonderful happen.

The "I Follow Jesus Holy Truth Church" is refreshingly different in its approach to what is the heart of our many fine Christian churches scattered around the Twin Cities and surrounding areas.

Although preaching is a valuable means of communicating the word of God, we prefer to focus on acting "hands on" by the means of serving that of which we have already learned. We want to take what we know and apply in our lives - starting in the community. We have seen how the joy of serving is contagious. When onlookers see how we live the word, they will witness honest faith.

Our building which houses our church (members) will mainly be used for these purposes.

1. Bible study occurring anytime 2 or more care to gather.

2. Discussing the different projects of service we are currently doing and their progress. Determining what other needs our community demands that we will have to address, and plan how to effectively handle them. Then addressing the impact these actions may have. We will be vigilantly aware to keep refining our means of service to be the most utmost efficient.

3. Addressing problematic concerns of members and guests by means of relating our own true life experiences and their resulting outcomes. No advice, speculation, or guessing given. Members will follow these and other ground rules as best they can.

4. Events and activities - of course, there will always be a time to have soe fun. We will play and socialize as well.

At the bottom, on either side of the ad, there are two ornate crosses and the words "Generous givers change our emotions." Below this it says "You may become a donor who: makes us satisfied - any amount; makes us happy - $100; makes us excited - $500; makes us most joyful - $1,000; makes us extremely grateful - $10,000; makes us cry - $100,000 or more."

A few comments for the folks at the I Follow Jesus Holy Truth Church, based on this ad:

1. Your church's "success" (whatever that means) does not "mainly depend on the hearts of those who want to make something really positive and powerfully wonderful happen." Your church's "success" depends on God.

2. You say your church is "refreshingly different" in that it is at the heart of what other churches in the area are doing. How's that different?

3. Preaching is, in my opinion, the most effective way the word of God is communicated to the world. Serving is good and noble, but don't serve the community at the expense of the preaching of the word.

4. Never (NEVER!) quantify your level of satisfaction based on the amount of a monetary gift. This runs the almost certain danger of alienating someone who can only give $5.00. According to your scale, that person can only make you satisfied - not even happy, let alone "most joyful"! Ever heard of the widow's mite?

5. This ad really looks atrocious. At the very least, make sure that words are spelled correctly and your grammar is accurate. People are watching.

The more I think about it, I think this might be a scam just to get people to send whoever placed this ad some money. Either way, it's definitely unique.

For My Christmas List

2011-04-11T21:12:00.000-05:00

I happened upon this website today. It's full of T-shirts and other products with a reformed theological slant. Some of my favorites: "Calvinism: When a finite God just won't do." and "Charles Spurgeon is my homeboy." There's even a shirt that has a picture of tulip on it, and then lists the five points of Calvinism. Cool. I guess it just goes to show you that no matter who you are, what your interests or beliefs are, there's somebody out there (usually on the internet) trying to make money off you.

Cherry Tomatoes? No Thanks.

2011-04-09T22:33:00.000-05:00

Our whole family went to a wedding and reception tonight. Betsy's second cousin was married, and the reception followed at a golf club in Cottage Grove. We got to the reception at 5:00 PM and weren't served our meal until about 7:35. It was tough to be there with the kids. The meal was served in courses: bread, salad, and then main course. When our salads came out, the kids weren't given one, so they just picked off stuff from the adults' salads. After we had finished the salads, I noticed that Ferg had picked around a cherry tomato and avoided eating it. Not thinking that he had ever had a cherry tomato before, I encouraged him to try it. He's usually pretty good about trying new foods. He'll try pretty much anything at least once. Well, let's just say that he's not a fan (neither am I, for that matter - like father like son, I guess). Mom was quick with the camera and caught the following progression.

1. Ferg takes a bite.

2. Initial reaction.

3. Down the hatch, even though he didn't like it. What a trooper.

4. Time to wash out the taste with a little Sprite.

Jesus Wants You To Friend Him

2011-04-04T17:39:00.000-05:00

Several months ago I "liked" The Bible on Facebook. For a long time "The Bible" never posted anything - it just sat dormant. You'd think that The Bible would post its verses on its Facebook wall, but apparently not. Then one day, The Bible started posting like mad. Several times a day The Bible posted, and each post showed up in my news feed. The strange thing was, though, that it was posting under the name Mark Brown, who is apparently the page's creator. And Mark didn't post Bible verses. Instead he posted a lot of self-help kind of stuff, and a lot of pretty loose theology. I don't know Mark Brown, but I think it's safe to say he's no theologian.

Today I "unliked" The Bible after I saw this post: "The Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ is, in a way, a lot like Facebook. Jesus has friend requested the entire world and He is awaiting your response. Will you 'friend' Him?" That's about the stupidest thing I've ever heard, and it cheapens the relationship between God and man and removes from it elements of holiness and righteousness in ways I won't go into here.

Folks, Jesus has not friended the world. And he's not sitting at his divine computer, waiting for you to friend him.

The G.O.S.P.E.L

2011-04-04T12:13:00.002-05:00

Here's a pretty cool, stylized gospel presentation. Take a look.

G.O.S.P.E.L. from Humble Beast Records on Vimeo.

Let's Go, Twins.

2011-04-02T13:44:00.000-05:00

As I write this, I'm listening to the Twins getting beat by the Toronto Blue Jays in the second game of the season. Things haven't looked good so far, but that's OK. It's a marathon, not a sprint. Last night (the season opener) the Twins lost 13-3. But there's still 160 games to play.

I like to start each season with a great quote from the Terrance Mann character in the movie Field of Dreams, as played by James Earl Jones: "The one constant through all the years has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It's been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt, and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game - It's a part of our past. It reminds us of all that once was good...and it could be again."

Helping Kids Understand the Problem of Evil

2011-03-30T11:53:00.000-05:00

I am privileged to be the 5-6 grade Sunday School teacher at Riverview. It's just me and usually 4-5 kids. It's been a lot of fun.

Our curriculum this year is "My Purpose Will Stand" put out by Children Desiring God. It's a fantastic curriculum that teaches kids about the providence of God.

Last week our lesson was focused on how evil fits into the sphere of God's providence. Does God control evil? Is he more powerful than evil people? Does he even (gulp) ordain evil things to happen? The answer to all of those questions, as we saw last week, is a resounding, "Yes!"

This week the lesson focuses on how God can allow (and even ordain) evil and still remain good. It's essentially a theodicy for 5th and 6th graders. This week we are learning that God remains good and righteous because he merely allows sinful people to do what sinful people want to do. This being understood, however, God is still powerful enough to intervene and prevent evil if and when he chooses.

Coupled with this idea is one that asserts that all the good things we have are evidences of God's mercy towards us. The lack of good things and existence of evil, then, can also be understood as God sovereignly and providentially removing his hand of mercy from us so that evil might occur. But how is this fair? Since God is loving, couldn't he be accused of wrongdoing by removing his hand of mercy from upon us and allowing bad things to happen? This week's lesson provides what I thought was an excellent example of how God remains just in removing mercy and allowing evil:

Suppose it were really cold out. I have dressed warmly for the cold with a coat, hat, mittens, and scarf. But you didn't wear a hat or scarf or even mittens. So I say to you, "Why don't you use my hat and mittens for a while?" You don't deserve to use my hat and mittens. I don't owe you the use of my warm clothes. I am offering them to you out of the goodness of my heart. So you put on my mittens and my hat. After a while, I say to you, "I'd like my hat and mittens back now." Am I bad to ask for my mittens and hat back? Am I doing wrong by taking back my warm clothes? Is it sinful for me to put my mittens and hat back on? No. I didn't owe you anything. You did not deserve my warm clothes. I was being kind by letting you use them for a while.

This is similar to how Job saw the situation with God allowing Satan to touch him. Job was undeserving of any mercy from God, yet God gave him health, wealth, and a family. Job had done none of these things - they were all given to him from God's heart of love. God had blessed Job, and kept Satan from touching Job time after time. God had extended mercy after mercy to Job. God allowed Satan to touch Job this time. This is kind of like saying, "I think I'll take my hat and mittens back for a while." Job did not have the right to demand mercy from God. God is the Most High; he has the right to do whatever he wants, and whatever he does is right. He is wise and he is loving.

Most of the time when we think about God and evil, we end up trying to justify ourselves - trying to assert that we don't deserve evil because we are such good people. In reality the opposite is true. We deserve evil but receive mercy. This should put life's trials and difficulties in a pretty different perspective. In R.C. Sproul's book The Holiness of God he says that the proper question to ask when something bad happens isn't "Why me?" Rather, we should be asking "Why not me?" Shall we receive good from God and shall we not receive evil (Job 2.10) Pretty deep stuff for 5-6 graders, but I think they're getting it, and they're coming to know and love God more. It's a lot of fun.

Suggestions for Professors

2011-03-29T21:53:00.001-05:00

I'm rounding out the third year of my seminary education. Tonight marked the beginning of my spring quarter classes. After my class tonight (and the last three years of seminary) I was motivated to come up with a list of suggestions for seminary professors as to how they should think and act regarding graduate level teaching. If you've been through some sort of higher education, you can probably identify with some of these. These suggestions come as a result of working with professors from both Sioux Falls Seminary and Bethel Seminary the last three years.

But before I get into the suggestions (which are mostly formed from negative experiences I've had in seminary) I have to say that I've had just as many outstanding professors as I have poor ones (see here and here). Unfortunately, however, it always seems the poor ones have the most influence. So kudos to you who teach fairly and honestly. Jeers to those of you who treat your position as trivial, and don't realize the monumental impact you have on the hearts and minds of the students you teach. So without further ado, here are my suggestions to seminary professors.

1. Don't ridicule someone (or a group of people) who doesn't hold your position. You probably don't realize it, but any student who finds themselves holding the position contrary to the one you espouse feels silently ridiculed by their association to those whom you find to be ignorant and uneducated. You can certainly think what you want, but to teach in such a way that undercuts the opposing viewpoint without providing a reasoned argument for your position is intellectually dishonest, arrogant, and logically fallacious. Point out strengths and weaknesses of the positions of those with whom you disagree, as well as your own position and let the student decide. And do so in a way that is respectful and edifying.

2. Don't act as though obvious things are significant revelations that only you have discovered. Most of the time, you do this in order to undercut those who disagree with you and to further your own agenda and ideas. It's not intellectually honest.

3. Don't cite yourself in your lectures. It sounds incredibly arrogant (because it is, most of the time) when you talk about how you've "explained all this in detail in my book." No one cares. Yeah, you're smart; yeah, you've written a book. Get over it. The rest of us have. Also, don't try to validate your position by citing yourself. It's fallacious.

4. Don't use your position as a professor simply to further your academic career. Teach because you want to teach. Don't teach so you can write a paper and get a promotion. Students pay good, hard-earned money to receive an education from you. Hold yourself accountable and do your job without always looking for the next step. This makes you a bad teacher, because you're more invested in your own interests than those of your students.

5. Do use class time wisely, and use all of it. When you break down the numbers, students pay an astronomical amount for each minute of class time. So make sure to use the available class time well. Don't let your classes out early. Don't slough off class time by assigning "small group time." I have a suspicion that you sometimes don't make the most of class time because you don't have enough material to fill the whole time. If this is the case, redesign the class, charge less, and hold yourself accountable. Again, students pay a lot for this time, so use it wisely.

6. Do value the level of your students' learning more than you value the idea of yourself holding a position within the academy. I have found that there are a lot of professors who love the idea of themselves as being a professor. Like number 4 above, this makes you a bad teacher, and for the same reasons.

7. Do realize that a lot of the students under your care will take everything you say as gospel truth. True, you are not responsible for students who do not discern the truth for themselves, but you are responsible for their intellectual growth at least to some extent. In their eyes, you are a very educated person who knows what he or she is talking about (and for the most part, you do). But many of the students in seminary are young and impressionable, and are more than willing to sacrifice what they've believed for the newest and trendiest academic opinion. Be careful.

8. Do realize that as trendy as your current position might be, someday it will be dated and out of fashion. Someday you will be the one that young seminary professors are taking shots and, and it will be your views and ideas that will be ridiculed and treated as uniformed and anti-intellectual. Be humble, because someday you're going to be the guy whose views everyone looks at and asks, "What was he thinking?"

Thoughts On My First Wedding

2011-03-26T23:41:00.000-05:00

This post's title needs a bit of explaining. I've only been married once, and I plan to keep it that way. The first wedding that I'm referring to is one that I officiated. Ken Marz and Sarah Heckathorn tied the knot today and I was privileged to be the one to be a part of it. Truth be told, I only did the vows, ring ceremony, and pronouncement (the easy stuff). Another minister did the message. I just basically had to find some vows to use and a traditional ring ceremony. No problem. The biggest concern I had was just not messing it up during the ceremony. All in all, it was a pretty cool experience, and I'm glad to have been a part of it. Thanks to Ken and Sarah for having me be a part of their wedding.

After the wedding I stopped at a local gas station to get some stuff I needed for my Sunday School class. The clerk noticed that I was dressed up, and actually asked if I was going to a wedding. I told him that I already had been. He asked if I was then on my way to the reception (it was about 5:30 PM). I told him that was already over too. He was in disbelief. He couldn't believe that the reception was already over at such an early time. But I guess that's what happens when you have a pretty "tame" ceremony. One without booze or dancing (not that there's anything wrong with those things; I just think it was a neat testament to the convictions of the couple - so kudos to Ken and Sarah for that).

My systematic theology prof at Sioux Falls told a neat story about a minister he knew who began each wedding ceremony he conducted by having the bride and groom sign the marriage certificate, hand it to him, and then he threw it on the floor and said, "Now that we've rendered unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, we will render unto God that which is God's." He did this to underscore the fact that a marriage is first and foremost a covenantal relationship that finds its meaning in the eyes of God, and not in the eyes of the state. His point was, yes, the state says you are married, but what does God say? The spiritual significance of marriage is much more important than the legal significance.

That little story stuck with me, and I've thought about it quite a bit. I really like it. I told Ken and Sarah that I was going to make a similar distinction when I did their vows. I wasn't as dramatic as to throw the marriage certificate on the floor, but I did make sure to mention that the important business was about to take place (making a covenant with and before God), and that the unimportant business (signing the marriage certificate) was just that - unimportant. I don't think the significance can be overstated.

All in all, it was a good experience, and I'm looking forward to repeating it many times in the future.

Teaching My Kids To Hate

2011-03-25T15:35:00.000-05:00

Don't be too concerned with the title of this post. It's not really what it sounds like. Well, maybe it is.

As kids usually do, my oldest has picked up on my own use of the word "hate." Like, "Oh, I hate when that happens," or "I hate when the toast lands butter side down!" or something like that. I use the word to express disgust or disappointment at every day things. It's a common part of my vernacular, and I usually don't think twice about it when I say the word. That is, until my 3 year old started saying that he hated everything. "I hate this show!" or "I hate this toy." When he started saying that, I wasn't too much of a fan of the word "hate."

We started to tell him that it was not OK to say "hate," which meant I had to watch my own use of the word as well. I could't hold him to a standard that I wasn't willing to hold myself to. The reason we gave him for not using the word was that to hate something was to really dislike it very much, almost as if to wish something didn't exist. It's just a strong word that we didn't want our kids using on a regular basis.

But then I got to thinking about it: there are some things that are worthy of hatred; some things that it is right to hate. For instance, murder, or abortion, or injustice. So rather than tell my kids not to hate anything, I've switched to telling my oldest that we must love the things God loves and hate the things God hates. But before we better be really sure that God hates something before we go around hating it too.

Yesterday while Ferg and I were driving home from Grandma D's house, he said to me out of the blue, "Grandma doesn't say 'hate.' Then we got to talking about how we should love the things God loves and hate the things God hates. Kind of deep for a three year old, but I think he started to get it. At first, he didn't seem to understand how God could hate anything, but I explained to him that God hates sin, and he hates it when we treat each other badly. This was still pretty tough for him to grasp, so I think it's going to be a process.

I think this is a good exercise, though. I hope it gets my kids to start thinking theologically about the world and how they think: Is this something that God hates? How do I know? Is this something that I should hate?

If all this sounds weird, it might be a bit - at least within our culture of tolerance. Nobody likes to think about hatred, or ever wants to be known as someone who hates. But I, for one, would proudly state that I hate abortion. Hatred of one thing implies love for its opposite. I hate abortion because I love children. I hate injustice because I love fairness. I hate sin because I love righteousness (by God's grace). So we all hate something. Even people who claim to love tolerance must then hate intolerance (as ironic as that is). The key is hating the right things - the things that God hates. This is what I'm trying to teach Ferg. It'll probably be a long and delicate process.

An Animal-Gender-Inclusive Bible

2011-03-25T00:18:00.001-05:00

You can file this under the category, "If You Don't Laugh, You'll Cry." Turns out the PETA folks have noticed the new gender inclusive rendering of the NIV Bible, and have encouraged the translators to refer to animals in the Bible as either "he" or "she" instead of "it." No, this is not a joke.

What is a joke (even though this is totally true) is that this suggestion is actually spurring some conversation amongst some folks. Get serious people.

What I find to be a bit confusing is why PETA people would even bring up this issue in the first place. Certainly the Bible does not see animals in the same light as the PETA folks. Animal sacrifice, anyone? How do the PETA people justify that in their reading of scripture. It seems to me that anyone who subscribes to PETA's philosophy would deplore the way animals are treated in the Bible. Then why bother with the personal pronouns?

Phil Johnson tweeted that he predicts that Zondervan would have an animal gender inclusive Bible published within the next five years. Considering all the crazy Bibles that have been published recently, I can't say I would be surprised if he's proven right (unfortunately).

Rob Bell May Be Done

2011-03-23T22:48:00.000-05:00

Yeah, the Rob Bell posts are getting kind of old, but more and more stuff just keeps coming out that is too good to pass up. This time it comes from Frank Turk from Pyromaniacs (one of the top Christian blogs out there) in the form of one of his open letters. Good stuff.

When the content of Bell's latest book became public, John Piper tweeted "Farewell, Rob Bell," which incited a firestorm of criticism about the tweets meaning, although I think Piper was simply referring to the fact that with this book Bell was taking a significant step away from orthodox Christianity. From what I've been reading, I think Piper's tweet may have been prophetic. It's getting harder and harder to take Rob Bell and those like him seriously. These guys are so far away from orthodoxy at some points that it's becoming difficult to be a part of their "conversation."

A Response from Rob Bell.

2011-03-22T11:54:00.000-05:00

Here it is. Take a look at it. Judge for yourself. Some of the comments are interesting. From all that I've read (including this response and explanation of his beliefs from his own mouth), I think it would still be most accurate to describe Bell's position as universalism. He denies the identification, however, and says that the essence of love is freedom, so God cannot force people into heaven who don't want to be there. What he very slyly walks around though, is his belief that everyone will choose God because God's "love wins." That's just another brand of universalism.

John 2 (JSV - Joel Standard Version)

2011-03-21T11:57:00.001-05:00

Another translation attempt. Check here, here, and here for info on my translation procedures.

JOHN 2
And on the third day a wedding came to be in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. But Jesus and the disciples of him were invited to the wedding. And lacking wine, the mother of Jesus said to him, “Wine, they do not have.”

And Jesus said to her, “What with me and you, woman? Not yet is here, the hour of me.”

The mother of him said to the servants, “Anything which he may say to you, you do.”

But there were there stone water pots from the purification of the Jews, containing each two or three gallons. Jesus said to them, “Fill the water pots of water,” and they filled them to the brim.

And he said to them, “Now draw out and carry to the headwaiter.”

So they carried. But when he tasted – the headwaiter – the water to wine it became, and he had not known from where it is, but the servants had known, the ones having drawn the water.

The headwaiter called the bridegroom and he said to him, “Every man, first the good wine he sets out, and when they drank much, the poorer. You have kept the good wine until now.”

This he did, the beginning of the signs of Jesus, in Cana of Galilee, and he manifested the glory of him, and they believed in him, the disciples of him.

After this he went down into Capernaum, he and the mother of him and the brothers and the disciples of him, and there they remained not many days.

And near was the Passover of the Jews, and Jesus went up into Jerusalem.

And he found in the temple those selling oxen and sheep and doves and those changing money seated, and having made a scourge from cords, he drove all out from the temple, and the sheep and the oxen and the money changers. He poured out the coins, and the tables he overturned, and to those selling doves, he said, “Take these things from here, do not make the house of the Father of me a house of merchandise.”

They remembered – the disciples of him – that it is written, “The zeal of the house of you will be consuming me.”

Then the Jews answered and said to him, “What sign do you show to us that these things to do?”

Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it.”

Then the Jews said, “Forty and six years it was being built, this temple, and you in three days will raise it?”

But that he said about the temple of the body of him.

When, therefore, he was raised from the dead, they remembered – the disciples of him – that this he said, and they believed the scripture and the word which Jesus said.

But when he was in Jerusalem in the Passover feast, many believed in the name of him, seeing the miracles which he did. But Jesus, on His part, was not entrusting Himself to them, for He knew all men, and because he did not have a need that anyone may testify about man, for he knew what was in man.

My Thoughts On Hell

2011-03-20T15:10:00.001-05:00

A lot has been going on in the Christian blogosphere regarding Rob Bell's new book "Love Wins." It has inspired post after post from some of the leading evangelical voices about the doctrine of hell, and why it is essential to the gospel. I've even posted on Bell's book here and here. It turns out that Bell is headed smack dab into universalism, which is exactly where one tends to turn when one has rejected the doctrine of hell.

One of the main questions that Bell brings up in his book (it should be noted that I have not read his book, nor do I intend to, but I have read several reviews, such as this one, and have even heard from Bell's own mouth what he thinks, and I think I've got a pretty good grasp of what the book is all about) is, "If God is loving, then how can he send people to hell?" Bell says that if we say that God loves us so much that he wants to save us, but if we are tragically killed by a bus or something, that same God would then send us to an eternity of punishment and suffering. For Bell, those two ideas don't jibe. In fact, he says that the God who loves a sinner before death, but would punish a sinner with hell after death are two different gods altogether. From what I gather Bell believes that, in the end, "love wins" and God saves everyone.

For me, and the way I understand scripture, the idea that God loves everyone (since God is love) and yet will send those who have rejected him to an eternity of torment and punishment are not opposed to one another - in fact, they are essential to each other. That is to say that God's love cannot be separated from his justice (the fact that he will judge some for their sins and send them to hell). Moreover, I would say that God sends people to hell because he is love. Try wrapping your mind around that. Here's how you do it.

Mark Driscoll makes the excellent point that if God were going to save everyone, and that if in the end "love wins" (note: the kind of "love" that Bell is talking about when he says "love wins" is not the love of God), then that means that everyone will end up in heaven: you, me, pimps, thugs, child molesters, rapists, murderers, and the list goes on. That doesn't seem very fair, does it? Would a loving God let a child molester's sins go unpunished?

Here's the crux of the issue: if God is love, then he must punish evil. In fact, if he did not punish evil but instead allowed it, and moreover, rewarded it (by giving the wicked the promise of heaven), he would be unjust. And injustice is one of the most unloving things anyone can ever do. Therefore, since God is love, he must judge and punish sin. God's love and justice are inextricably linked - they cannot be separated.

If a child molester faced his day in court and was found guilty but was not punished, we would consider that to be a travesty of justice. So it is with God. God cannot let the guilty go unpunished. To do so would be unloving. So he condemns sinners to hell.

The catch here is that all human beings in one way, shape, or form, are guilty. No, you may have never molested a child or physically murdered someone, but you have undoubtedly stolen, hated, coveted, disrespected parents, lusted, etc. These are all damnable sins according to God's scales of justice. So then, every person who has ever lived is deserving of an eternity of punishment and torment in hell - everyone. You, me, the child molester, the murderer, the nice old lady next door, my kids - everyone. The real question isn't "How can a loving God send people to hell?" but rather, "How can a just God allow people into heaven?" Try wrapping your mind around that (and read the book of Romans for help)!

This is where Bell's example of God loving the sinner until he is tragically killed by the bus breaks down. It assumes that the person is not deserving of eternal punishment, when in fact he is. So when he is tragically killed by the bus, God doesn't flip a switch and become a vengeful, angry God. He remains who he is: loving and just.

The answer from scripture is that God made a way for those who would believe to be justified through the death and resurrection of Christ. Jesus took the punishment that sinners who believe so richly deserve, making them just in God's sight and removing them from judgment. The righteousness that was Christ's now belongs to us, and the judgment that belonged to us was given to him. That's the beauty of the gospel. And it's not that we believe out of fear of a vengeful God, but rather we believe out of gratitude for, you guessed it, his great love! God is love. This is why he sent his son as a sacrifice for all those who would believe, and why he justly punishes sinners. The Christian realizes the severity of his or her own sin and the depth of his or her own deservedness of hell, and then looks at the cross and realizes the debt has been paid. What love!

One of Bell's follow up questions to that, however, would be "What about those people who have never heard of Jesus? Like people in the deepest, darkest jungles of Africa? Would God send them to hell because they've never heard about Jesus?" Well, first of all, I reject the question, because the Bible never says that people who have never heard about Jesus will go to hell, it says that people who have sinned will go to hell. And the Bible also says that all people have revelation from God in two ways (Romans 1), whether they live in the metropolis or in the deepest jungles of Africa. God has made himself plain to all people through his acts of creation (the creation proves there's a Creator) and he has written the law on all hearts (people inherently know right from wrong because God has shown it to them). This revelation, I believe, is enough to cause someone - anyone - to realize that GOD IS. And it is also enough to condemn them to judgment and punishment. That being said, I believe God is a kind and merciful God, not willing that any should perish. In other words, I believe that if there is someone in a deep dark jungle somewhere who connects the dots (realizes that creation proves the Creator, and that he has a moral standard given by a Moral Lawgiver) that God is powerful enough to direct that person to the gospel (through a missionary, or through the westernization of the world - Bibles are constantly being published in new languages, and churches are being built all the time all over the world for people who have never had them before).

It is in this sense that the question "Why would a loving God send people to hell?" is faulty to begin with. In one sense, God does not send people to hell - people send themselves there by rejecting the revelation of truth that has been given to them. True, God is the one who is sovereign over their punishment, but the sin of a person is what induces God's judgment. God doesn't send people to hell - he judges their sin, which is deserving of hell.

At the same time, I personally believe (and this is my personal belief - not something I would die for) that there are and will be levels of punishment in hell based upon the amount of divine revelation a person was exposed to in this life (Luke 10.10-16). This means that those in the deep jungles of Africa who have never heard the gospel will receive a lesser judgment than those who live in America, own a Bible, have heard the gospel numerous times, gone to church all their life, etc. but still do not believe the truth. This lesser judgment will not be desirable, to be sure, but I think that those who have been so exposed to the truth and have still rejected it will be held even more accountable than those who have not (I would also argue that this is why babies or children who die at an extremely young age will not be sent to hell - God is a kind, merciful, and graceful God).

This is just a small taste of this discussion, and I would recommend that you check out the articles I linked to earlier. These are just some of the thoughts that have been rattling around in my head lately.

The doctrine of hell is essential to the gospel. Without it, the gospel loses all value (not to mention that if everyone is saved, and if in the end "love wins," then why bother preach the gospel at all? It seems to devalue the Great Commission to me). Again, I think the real issue here is trying to understand how a just God can allow me - a sinner - to be justified, and to spend my time trying to figure that one out. And to praise and glorify God that I have not received the punishment that I so richly deserve; and to magnify Christ, who would take my place on the cross and bear the full force of God's wrath in my place. "O how marvelous! O how wonderful! And my song shall ever be, O how marvelous! O how wonderful! Is my Savior's love for me."

NIV 2011

2011-03-18T14:26:00.002-05:00

UPDATE: Here's some more info on the 2011 NIV from the mouth of Chip Brown, Senior VP for Bibles at Zondervan.

This article caught my eye yesterday. I had known that the 2011 NIV revision was coming out for some time now. Biblegateway.com has had it on their site for months before the print version was released. Not being a big fan of the NIV, I didn't really look into it. The 2011 NIV was thrust into my view last week, though, when one of my regular professors took ill and couldn't teach a class. He had a fellow faculty member fill in for him, who just happened to be on the translation committee that did the 2011 NIV revision. Dr. Janine Brown told us quite a bit about what it was like to be a part of that process. It was very interesting.

Among the discussions we've had in my hermeneutics class this past quarter has been a discussion as to which kind of bible translation is preferable: formal equivalence (word for word) or functional equivalence (thought for thought). The NIV is definitely more of a functional equivalence translation. That is, the translators were more concerned that the meaning of the text was communicated in the translation than they were that the actual words used in the original languages were conveyed in the translation.

Personally, I think that each philosophy has a solid argument for its use. My professors argued that functional equivalence translations were actually more accurate, because they conveyed the meaning of the text, rather than just the words (leaving the determination of meaning up to the reader). For example, Matthew 5.12 in the ESV reads: "And he opened his mouth and taught them, saying..." while the new NIV renders the same verse simply as: "...and he began to teach them." The ESV is closer to the original language, but in order to really understand it you need to know that saying that someone opened his or her mouth before he spoke is a commonly used idiom in the Greek language. It doesn't really mean anything other than that someone was speaking. The NIV translators (and other functional equivalence translators) chose to just interpret that part for you and give you something easier to read, hence "...and he began to teach them," instead of "And he opened his mouth and taught them."

The thing I don't like about functional equivalence translations is that there's always an element of trust that must be given to the translators. I have to trust that when a translator makes a leap from "And he opened his mouth and taught them," to "...and he began to teach them," that he or she knows what they are doing by making such a leap. In most cases, this is not an issue. People who translate the Bible are very smart and have put a lot of time and energy into what they do. In other cases, however, the chasm that must be leapt over in the translation process can be pretty wide, and the reader is forced to trust that the translator has made the right decision. This is more trust than I am willing to give.

Also, I think there is value in forcing oneself to get down and dirty with the text. Yes, when we convey that someone is speaking, we usually don't say "And he opened his mouth." We usually just say, "He said..." But to remove that element of the text takes me as a reader one step further from what was actually written. It might mean more work for me to understand what was actually meant by the original writing, but I'm OK with that. I'd rather put in a little more effort and maybe have to learn a bit more about the text to get the meaning myself than have to trust someone else to do that work for me.

The article that I linked to above talks about some gender issues with the new NIV revision. You may or may not remember that when the TNIV (Today's New International Version) came out, there was quite the hubub about pronouns being switched from masculine to being gender neutral. In most cases, this does not effect meaning, but in others, it does. Apparently some of those same issues exist in the 2011 NIV as well.

For example, when an author of scripture refers to his "brothers," (as in, fellow Christians) he almost certainly doesn't mean just men, but rather men and women of the faith. So the 2011 NIV renders those verses as "brothers and sisters." While I have no problem with gender inclusiveness, I think this is an issue of formal vs. functional equivalence, and again, I would prefer the formal equivalence translation. While I agree that the use of the term "brothers" refers to more than just men, it is still one step further from the original writing. And I'd like to be as close to that as possible. But maybe that's just me.

Take a look at the article. It has a lot of good information.

The Grace to Drive (or Park)

2011-03-17T20:50:00.002-05:00

One of the only things that George Carlin ever said that I've actually appreciated was something to this effect: "Have you ever noticed how, when you're driving, everyone is an idiot except you? Do you think that might be a little strange? What are the odds that you're the only non-idiot on the road?" The man's got a point. In other words, when we're behind the wheel, we automatically justify whatever it is we do (even if we're clearly in the wrong) and tend to demonize other drivers when they make a mistake (even though we've probably done the same thing many times ourselves). There's a significant disconnect there.

On Wednesday morning I was mailing some packages at the Signal Hills post office. After I had done my business, I got in the car and put it in reverse. I looked in all three of my mirrors and over each shoulder, like I normally do when I'm backing up. I didn't see anyone or anything. I proceeded to back out of my spot and made a 90 turn in reverse out of the parking spot. When the car stopped and I put it in "Drive," I heard a loud banging on my rear window. I looked in the mirror and saw a woman standing there, saying something to me. I opened my car door (because my window doesn't work) and she walked up to me where I was sitting. She said, "You almost ran me over, why didn't you look?" I was dumbfounded. I said, "I did look. I'm sorry I didn't see you." She then said in a really angry voice, "You were so busy backing up that you weren't looking. You could have run me over." I said once again, "I was looking, but I somehow didn't see you. I'm sorry." She huffed at me and walked away. I closed my door and drove away.

What really happened? Who knows. Obviously she feels that I was not taking the necessary precautions. I feel that I did take those precautions, but she somehow was in a place that I couldn't see clearly. I'm just glad that she wasn't seriously injured, and I hope she comes to understand the sincerity of my apology. I could have gotten all worked up about it and yelled at her for walking behind an obviously moving vehicle, or how she must have clearly seen that I was moving, considering she was all the way at the end of my 90 degree back up procedure. But whatever. I'll admit that I might have been in the wrong and apologize for it. The point is, we all goof up, especially when driving (or parking, as it were). I need grace when I'm driving, and I need to give it to other people too.

Rob Bell Gets the Smack Down

2011-03-17T20:35:00.001-05:00

Even Martin Bashir can tell Rob Bell's a goof. Although to be fair, Bashir's interviewing methods were not maybe all that fair. It seemed as though he already had a bias against Bell. In the interview, Bashir says, "One critique of your book says this, 'There are dozens of problems with Love Wins - the history is inaccurate, the use of scripture, indefensible.' That's true, isn't it?" Bell's best response: "No, it's not true." That's it? That's how he defends himself against his critics? Oh well. Couldn't have happened to a better person.

Love Wins

2011-03-15T22:52:00.001-05:00

I had heard a while ago that Rob Bell was coming out with a new book, and that a lot of leaders in the evangelical world were having somewhat of a bad reaction to the content of the book. There was some evidence here and there that pointed to Rob Bell adopting universalism and rejecting the idea of hell and eternal punishment. Instead it was beginning to seem that Bell was asserting that all people would be saved and receive the promise of eternal life. Blogs were written, and some of the same leaders who had previously expressed worry about what Bell's beliefs seemed to be morphing into began writing the man off and labeling him as a false teacher.

Meanwhile, fans of Rob Bell wrote on their own blogs in defense of the pastor, arguing for his universalistic tendencies (including some who attempted to downplay Bell's tendency toward universalism), and also to decry those who would question him. One blog I read (a "friend" on Facebook posted it, who is also a fan of Bell) rips John Piper and Justin Taylor for judging Bell before the book was even released (which is ironic, because to say that someone is judging someone else is a judgment against that person). This particular blogger doesn't even seem to have read Justin Taylor's blog that originally criticized Bell's upcoming work. Taylor never claims to be making absolute judgments, but that he is simply connecting the dots of what Bell has been saying/writing/teaching/preaching lately.

One of the main criticisms leveled against conservative evangelicals is that they perhaps appeared to be unfairly criticizing Bell and his book before the book was even released, although after looking into the criticisms leveled against Bell, I don't think this was the case. No one was claiming that Bell was a universalist, but just that certain things said, written, and video recorded and put on the internet seemed to suggest that Bell was trending that way.

Well, now that Bell's book has been released and reviewed, it would appear that all concerns that Bell was trending toward universalism (and even promoting universalism) have been confirmed. Here's Kevin DeYoung's review of the book (it's rather long, but it's worth the read, if for no other reason than to learn more about universalism and to be encouraged in sound doctrine).

I have one or two of Bell's previous books, and they both have a permanent position on the "Heresy Shelf" of my library. And this was before it was known that Bell was a full-fledged universalist. It would seem that my own and others' fears about Rob Bell were not unfounded. I used to chomp at the bit to read books like this, but nowadays I just don't have the stamina needed to get through them anymore. Most false teaching is just the same recycled garbage that has been around for centuries.

I think the proper response to this guy and his teachings should be one of two things: 1) we should pray that he would repent, be restored to the truth, and cling to sound doctrine, and failing that, 2) we should pray that God silence him and/or show his teaching to be unsound and unorthodox. Rob Bell is one of the most prominent Christians in the country right now. Tens of thousands of people cling to what he teaches. Some have even said that he is the "next Billy Graham." May it never be so.

Pro - "Whole Life"

2011-03-14T15:46:00.005-05:00

This bi-month's issue of Relevant Magazine featured 50 Ideas That Changed Everything. The collection is a celebration of Relevant's 50th issue. The 50 ideas include things like the rise of Indie music, pop culture trends in filmmaking, Tivo, the Emergent Movement, and theological trends in the church. It's a pretty big smorgasbord. One of the "ideas that changed everything" that caught my eye was number 24: "Pro Life Should Mean More Than Just Abortion Opposition." The magazine says, "Over the last 8 years, young Christians have embraced a more holistic definition of 'pro-life.' Though they are still opposed to abortion, that's not where pro-life stops now. Instead, this generation has adopted a whole-life ethic, which means they are opposed to unjust war, torture, the death penalty, oppression, and the crippling poverty that can be a death sentence for people around the world." In an earlier issue, Relevant editor Cameron Strang voiced the "whole-life ethic" by saying, "... the example Jesus set for us to stand up for the defense of the innocent does not end at birth. Just as they do for abortion, Christians should be on the forefront of standing against things that take millions of innocent lives around the world every day - systemic poverty, preventable disease, unnecessary wars, slavery, genocide. The list goes on."

I've got some problems with this way of thinking, and I've talked about it before, here and here. But my biggest problem with this way of thinking is that it implies that the church has traditionally ignored issues of poverty, torture, unjust war, and oppression in the past, and that fighting for life in these areas is somehow a new thing with this upcoming generation. This implication, however, is completely ignorant of the historical and present reality of the ministry of the church to the world in all areas of life. If this is what this generation thinks, it's ignorant and needs to take a church history class and look into current local and global missions work and Christian humanitarian aid efforts. Christians all over the world are fighting for life. In America, we focus on abortion because it is an incredibly serious problem in this country. But, to be sure, Christians are concerned for all threats to life everywhere. You can take that to the bank.

Here's the proof: columnist David French ran the numbers, and it turns out Christians today (and yesterday, and 100 years ago, before abortion was even an issue) overwhelmingly support "whole-life" ministries and charities. And I mean overwhelmingly. The amount of time and money Christians give to anti-abortion and homosexuality charities or campaigns (although homosexuality isn't really at issue as much in this debate) are literal blips on the radar screen compared to how much we give (in time, money, and resources) to fighting poverty, illness, and oppression.

So then why this push for being so called "Pro Whole-Life?" If it turns out that Christians already are pro whole-life, then why does a generation of Christians think we aren't, and why do they feel it is there responsibility to call the church out on this issue? I can only think of two possible reasons: 1) the current generation is painfully and dangerously ignorant of the historical and present ministry of the church in the world, or 2) it's a strategy for promoting a liberal social agenda in this country and abroad. I tend to think it is the latter rather than the former, although I almost hope it's because we're just that stupid. This is the problem I've had with Cameron Strang and the folks at Relevant for some time now. They espouse a lot of social justice gibberish that sounds really good and noble, but in the end it seems to be good for nothing put promoting their liberal social agenda. The quote from Strang above is prefaced by an assertion that "This is where those on the right don't get it..."

Either way, the numbers don't lie: Christians are pro whole-life. I don't say that as a point of pride, because there is certainly more to be done to fight for life in the world, and the battle is never over. But to accuse the church of sleeping on the job just isn't accurate, helpful, or edifying.

My Savior's Love

2011-03-13T20:26:00.001-05:00

Lots of great songs in worship today. But the one that ministered to me the most was "My Savior's Love." I've sung this song a hundred times throughout my life, but it really struck home today. The refrain, when sung in context with the stanzas, is particularly powerful.

I stand amazed in the presence
Of Jesus the Nazarene
And wonder how He could love me
A sinner, condemned, unclean

O how marvelous! O how wonderful!
And my song shall ever be
O how marvelous! O how wonderful!
Is my Savior's love for me!

For me it was in the garden
He prayed: "Not My will, but Thine."
He had no tears for His own griefs
But sweat drops of blood for mine

He took my sins and my sorrows
He made them His very own
He bore the burden to Calvary
And suffered and died alone

When with the ransomed in glory
His face I at last shall see
Twill be my joy through the ages
To sing of His love for me

The Biggest Sandwich Ever

2011-03-12T22:01:00.000-06:00

My kids love this book. It's called "The Biggest Sandwich Ever." For some reason, they have both been really drawn to it. They both have gone through phases where they want it read to them each night (the youngest one is still in this phase). They've heard it so many times that they've started memorizing it. Here's Ferg's "reading" of the book from December of last year.

Now the Hanburger has started memorizing it. Here's her "reading."

If nothing else, it just goes to show you what kids are capable of. My kids certainly aren't geniuses, nor are they particular adept at memorization. But if they hear or see something enough, they will pick up on it (scripture memorization, anyone?).

A Variation on the Jump

2011-03-04T19:59:00.000-06:00

The kids wanted to build a jump tonight, so we did. Except, by the time I came into the living room after gathering the pillows, the kids had thrown them all on the couch. They said that instead of having the jump on the floor as usual, they wanted it on the couch, and they would just run into it. It didn't look nearly as fun that way to me, but they seemed to like it.

Sick Again

2011-03-02T22:34:00.001-06:00

A few weeks ago I had some not-so-pleasant experiences. I was probably the sickest I remember being in my life. I think it was the flu, but I guess I'm not sure since I never went in to see the doc. Well, last night, my throat began to hurt during Greek class. By the time I got home it was killing me, and I was flying high with a significant fever.

This morning I was feeling terrible - more fever, really sore throat, and my head was killing me. My fever was up to 102. I finally relented and went to see the doc tonight. Considering I'm preaching this Sunday, I thought it was best. It turns out I've got strep throat.

I feel just aweful. My head's still killing me, I'm still flying high, and my throat still hurts. I've got some amoxicillin in me, and hopefully things will look better tomorrow.

This has certainly been a winter to remember.

A Prayer

2011-02-28T21:48:00.000-06:00

I have a cousin that is a public school teacher in Eau Claire, Wisconsin. Like other public employees he will be significantly effected by the outcome of whatever happens in Madison, whether the bill passes or not. He wrote the following prayer. Amen, and amen.

Father, Our state and our country are in conflict. We are torn apart over how the wealth of our state should be used. We are experiencing a growing sense of anxiety because we feel those things we value and believe to be our right are being threatened. At times like this it is easy to embrace fear, anxiety and contempt. We confess that we have focused too much on our positions on the issue; and those news reports that feed our bias and stereotypes. We have looked for evidence that justified our belief that those on the other side of the issues are wrong; and more than wrong they are worthy of contempt, slander and misrepresentation. We have questioned motives and assigned blame and spoken with confidence about things for which we have inadequate information. We confess that this week we have often forgot civility, humility, respect, love and service. We have given voice to our inner fear and embraced worry. We have not sought to understand before being understood. We have exaggerated, mislead and ignored issues important to others.

Father, we admit that we have been angry, afraid, hurt, prideful, selfish and not as honest as we should be. Father, as your children we ask you to heal us. Give us the courage to rise above the fear and the pride. Give us the wisdom of your Son. The Prince of Peace. May we begin every day in your presence through prayer. May we pray over every issue. May you help us to pray for those who, in our heart, we have come to believe are our enemy. People who we have characterized as them, others or stranger. May you give us hearts and eyes to see and believe that they are neighbors, brothers and sisters and children of God.

Father, I confess my greed and trust in wealth and the fear that my wealth will be taken away. Forgive me for bowing down to this idol.

Father, we pray for those who you have called into service of this state. The police and firefighters. The civil servants and public sector employees. These men and woman are our neighbors and our friends. People with families who this week has felt accused, and even attacked. We ask you to bless them, comfort them, and give them courage. We pray you protect their jobs and give them the ability to provide for their families. We are thankful for them remembering that when they do their work of service they serve you as well.

Father, we pray also, for those who serve the children of our state. The teachers, coaches, administrators and support staff. Those who clean and maintain the schools. And all those who make our schools stronger and better. We pray for those who serve our kids when they are in crisis. The social workers and the social service employees. They stand in the gap and serve you by serving the young. This week they have felt unappreciated, blamed and disrespected. We ask that you bless them. Remind them that as they serve they serve you. Let them know that we love them, appreciate them and know they sacrifice in ways very few see. Speak comfort to them as they face cuts in compensation, operation budgets and the possibility of losing their jobs. Please, protect their jobs, provide for their needs and give them the means to provide for their families. Protect their hearts from discouragement, resentment and contempt.

Father, we pray for the leaders of our state. We pray for Gov. Walker and all the men and woman of our legislature. Father, we ask you to give them a spirit of courage and compassion. Give them divine wisdom to lead us through these uncertain times. Give our leaders a spirit of respect and consideration for each other’s ideas, values and priorities. Change the political discourse from one of adversaries trying to win, to servants together trying to heal. Forgive me, for slanderous statements I have said out loud and cherished in my heart towards some of those who are called to lead our state. Forgive me for spending more time criticizing than praying for our leaders as you have commanded. Rise up not the leaders we deserve but the leaders we need. Elevate their hearts and their words. Help them lead us through this season of uncertainty

Father, May you give us all the courage to share the burden of these uncertain and difficult times. May we all adopt a spirit of service and sacrifice. Father, glorify yourself by making peace, bringing healing and causing us to prosper in every way that really matters. We ask this in the name of your son Jesus Christ. Amen.

Cabin Ball!

2011-02-27T19:55:00.001-06:00

Another night on "The Jump."

Light Rail is More Deadly Than Guns

2011-02-25T15:09:00.000-06:00

Tragically, the 8th person to be killed by the Hiawatha light rail line since its opening in 2004 lost his life this past Saturday night. It's still unclear how the incident took place, but the fact remains that 8 people have lost their lives to light rail.

Joe Soucheray mentioned on his show this past week that the light rail train has been responsible for more deaths than the conceal and carry law that was passed in 2003. From what I can tell, after doing a bit of research (including reading the lengthy Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension 2006 report), there has been 1 death caused by an individual legally carrying a firearm.

I remember when the law was passed, many of the people who were against the conceal and carry law (which isn't actually a "conceal" and carry law) insisted that Minnesota would turn into an old west style town, where people would be shooting each other over common disagreements and for better parking spots. That, of course, hasn't happened. In fact, it would appear Minnesotans are far more likely to be killed by a light rail train than by someone legally carrying a firearm.

Don't get me wrong: any death caused by either light rail or by a gun is a tragedy, but it seems the hysteria over the conceal and carry law has been unfounded.

New Chucks

2011-02-25T13:50:00.001-06:00

I got my new All Stars in the mail today. I've been wearing Converse All Stars in one form or another since seventh grade. I love the shoe. To me, it's just the ideal form of comfortable footwear. It feels like I'm bear foot. That being said, if you like to keep your feet warm and dry, All Stars are not the shoe for you. But if you like to be comfortable, with a semi-retro flare, they're just the ticket.

I've custom made my last two pairs of Chucks. I like 'em brown, but they're not sold that way in the stores. It costs a little more, but I think it's worth it. Here's the pair I got in the mail today compared to my old pair.

Yeah, it was definitely time for a new pair.

Creepy

2011-02-17T21:33:00.001-06:00

My Greek prof used the following example as a way to open up our class tonight. He started by telling us about the death of Jim Morrison. Morrison moved to Paris, France in March of 1971 and died not too long after of a supposed drug overdose. The overdose was never confirmed by French medical authorities, so there has been some controversy surrounding the exact details of Morrison's death.

What does Jim Morrison have to do with Greek?

Morrison was buried in a borrowed grave (literally - it was leased for 30 years, which begs the question, what did they do after the 30 years was up? Re-up the lease on the plot or move the body?). At the time of his burial his grave had no marker, but the French government placed a "shield" around it which identified it as his final resting place. The shield was soon stolen, however. A bust of Morrison was crafted and placed at his grave in 1981 to mark the 10 year anniversary of his death, but that was defaced and eventually stolen as well. At some point in the 90's, Morrison's father made a flat stone to mark his son's grave, seen here:

As you can see, the marker bears Morrison's full name, the date of his birth and death, and a Greek inscription, transliterated as: "Kata ton daimona autou." After a little research about how this inscription came to be, I learned that his father had it put on the marker, and that he believes it to say "According to his own destiny," or as it is very loosely interpreted, "True to his own spirit."

I don't know who told Morrison's father that the inscription means "According to his own destiny," but that is certainly not what it says in Koine Greek, the type of Greek that the New Testament is written in. In New Testament Greek, the inscription literally reads, "According to the demon of him," or "According to his demon."

Admittedly, there are more types of Greek than just Koine Greek, so maybe "daimona" means something else, like "destiny," in some other form of Greek. But if you were to come across "daimona" (from "daimonion") in the New Testament (or in any other document written in Koine), it would mean one thing, and one thing only: demon.

It's kind of creepy to think about: the man's name, followed by the years of his life, and then the statement that it (his life) was "according to his demon."

A Week I Don't Want To Repeat

2011-02-15T22:22:00.000-06:00

Whew. I'm coming off one of the longest, most trying weeks I think I've ever experienced. And it wasn't because of stress at work, a busy school schedule, or anything of the like. Instead, it's been a week where I've been the sickest I think I've ever been.

About a week ago I posted about the initial effects of my illness, thinking at the time that the worst was passed, and that I was on the mend. However, it was not meant to be.

In that first post I mentioned that I don't remember ever throwing up as much as I had over that six hour period. What I didn't know at the time was that initial illness would morph into something else, almost just as bad, except lasting for about another five days, and I have still not completely cleared myself of the effects of whatever it was that got a hold of me.

My initial symptoms began late Monday night and lasted into Tuesday morning of last week. I spent most of Tuesday sleeping and resting. Wednesday found my stomach to be a bit more stable, although I still did not have much of an appetite. Thursday morning, I felt a bit feverish and had somewhat of a wheeze in my breathing and a small cough. I had my first real meal since the whole ordeal started on Thursday afternoon. By Thursday evening I went to class, thinking I could tough out the two hours and keep my small fever in check. But by 5:00 PM Thursday evening my head was swimming and I was feeling flushed. I left class, drove home quickly, and took my temperature to find I was running a fever of 100.5 degrees. Chills set in then, and I couldn't seem to get warm as I lay on the couch under a thick blanket. This lasted most of the night, and I didn't get much sleep as my cough became progressively worse.

By Friday morning I was coughing so hard that I could feel the coughs reverberate through my body when they came, and the fever was still high. Saturday was essentially the same as Friday. Keep in mind that I thought I was on the mend after the vomiting ended Tuesday morning. But here I was on Saturday, feeling like garbage. I spent the day Saturday trying to break my fever with cool, moist cloths on my head and pounding Advil. It didn't seem to be working.

On Sunday morning I was determined to go to church, so I got dressed and set off, even though I didn't feel any better. During worship team rehearsal that morning, I was clammy, sweaty, and felt like I was going to pass out. As soon as rehearsal ended I retreated to my office to await the beginning of Sunday School. Thanks to the Advil I was able to make it through Sunday School, and was even able to play through the worship set. I went home right after the set was over, though. On Sunday afternoon I feverishly made my way through my Greek homework, coughing so hard that it began to damage my vocal cords. My voice began to go, and the fever refused to break.

By Sunday evening I was dumbfounded that the fever had not broken as of yet. I couldn't imagine lying around the house sick for another day. I was so sick of doing nothing; so sick of feeling week and feeble; so sick of being sick.

Monday morning came and there was a slight break in the fever, for which I rejoiced. Instead of 100.5, it was now at 99.5. I spent another day at home, which was probably OK, since there was a lot of noise at the office due to the construction at the church. I did a little work and spent a lot of the day sleeping.

By about 9:00 Monday night I was sweaty and clammy again, and this time the fever was actually beginning to break. I did everything I could think of to help it along its way out. On Tuesday morning, the fever finally broke, and I got dressed and actually went into work for the first time since Monday the previous week. As I type this, I feel pretty good, but I can tell my body is still weak, and I am easily tired. But I think I'm on the mend for good, now.

All in all, it was seven days of illness. As I said before, I can't remember ever being so sick in my entire life - at least not for such an extended period of time. And my body has still not fully recovered. But praise God that I seem to be healing.

So what did I have? I'm not totally sure, but I've got a few guesses. My first thought is that I had some form of influenza that caused the vomiting and diarrhea that I experienced on Monday night and Tuesday morning, into Wednesday. Then, I think that form of flu morphed into a different type that effected my respiratory system for the last few days. From Thursday to today, my only symptoms have been fever and severe chest congestion, along with weakness and body aches. I did some research on the interwebs, and it seems that the respiratory flu best fits my symptoms.

Why not go to the doctor? Well, I originally thought the bug was out of my system on Tuesday. When the other symptoms crept up on Thursday, I thought it would just be a minor complication of my previous illness. But now I think it was another full-blown type of disease that I had contracted. So by the time I came to this realization, it was probably too late to see the doctor for him to be any help, plus it was the weekend, and I wasn't about to go to urgent care or the emergency room.

One thing I've been trying to get better at is to take a theological look at my life experiences. In other words, what is God trying to tell me or teach me (if anything) through whatever it is I am experiencing. I spent a lot of time in self-examination over the past week, asking God what it was he would have me see or learn from my week-long bout of illness. I think I got some answers. More on that in another post some other time.

Needless to say, it's been a long week, and I'm glad that it's over. And I'm glad I have learned what I have. But all things considered, it's not a week that I'm wanting to experience again any time soon.

Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Night

2011-02-08T11:50:00.000-06:00

Last night I was the sickest I can ever remember being in my entire life. I threw up five times over six hours. It was awful.

At around 10:00 PM I remember feeling some minor stomach twinges. By about 10:15 I was at home and resting comfortably in my leather chair, and the twinges seemed to be getting worse. I went and changed into my pajamas and laid down on the couch and watched some TV to try and pass the time, and hopefully pass the stomach twinges. It didn't happen.

Around 1:00 AM I was feeling sick enough to maintain a vigil in the bathroom. I wanted to be ready if and when I ralphed, so I sat on the edge of the tub and read a catalogue. When I finally stood up, I felt the barf coming and got rid of it into the toilet. Little did I know that was just the beginning of my night.

I usually feel better when I throw up, like most people. After this time I felt better too, but only for about two minutes. As soon as I was done in the bathroom my stomach started to cramp up again, and I went into the bedroom and told Beetz what happened, and that I'd be sleeping on the couch. She brought me a blanket and a puke pail (no, not one of the kids). I tried to sleep, but it wasn't happening. My stomach was hurting and bloating like nobody's business, and around 2:30 AM came round two. After this round I waited for the usual feeling that things were improving after throwing up. Again, it was not to be.

Round three came at about 3:45, and round four around 5:00. I just could not seem to get whatever it was making my stomach so upset actually out of my stomach. By 7:00 AM, my mom had arrived to watch over my kids. Right when she walked in the door I told her that things were about to get ugly, and she might want to go into Ferg's room, which she did, and round five commenced. At approximately 7:30 I moved my nest down to the basement, so my mom and the kids could get going. By this time, things were finally starting to improve a bit.

I can't recall ever being this sick in my entire life. I do remember one time as a kid when I barfed a few times in a row, but never on an almost hourly schedule. I've heard that things are going around, but no one I've heard of who has been sick recently has had it this bad.

Perhaps the worst part of the night was that I couldn't sleep for more than 20 minute intervals. After each time I ralphed I would go and lay down quick and try to sleep, but the ralphing had gotten my system so worked up that it didn't want to sleep. By the time I actually fell asleep, my stomach was in such discomfort that it would wake me up so I could go empty out. I didn't really sleep at all until about 7:30 this morning. Blech. What a terrible night. Combine that with the fact that we had a terrible night at our house the night before this little adventure, and it's no wonder I'm sick!

So now it's 11:45 AM and my stomach seems to have calmed down a bit, although I don't plan on testing it. I think I'll fast today and just drink some water. No doubt I lost enough fluid with all the puking. I'm just glad the night is over.

"Let's Build A Jump."

2011-02-06T00:50:00.000-06:00

One of the most funnest things we do at our house is "build a jump." A jump is a big pile of pillows and soft blankets, stacked up in front of some sort of apparatus from which one can leap into the pile of pillows. The tradition of "building a jump" started at my mom's house. She's been watching our kids, and from somewhere she got the idea to stack up pillows and have the kids jump on them. They love doing it, and now they constantly beg us to build a jump. The last few times we built a jump at our house we've had the camera out.

We push the automan up against the wall and Ferg jumps off that
onto the pillows.

Apparently jumping is hard work. After a few goes, Ferg tells me he's
sweaty and the shirt comes off.

Han's approach to the jump is a bit different. She's too small to
jump off the automan, so she just runs across the room and faceplants
into the pillows. As she runs she says "Ready, set, go!" It's super cute.

Apparently Mom is immune to the excitement a jump brings, as evidenced
by her checking her email during the craziness.

Ferg shouts "Cabin Ball!" every time he jumps. I think he means
"Cannon Ball," but it's close enough.

Han eventually got up the nerve to let her brother drag her off the
automan onto the pillows. She still doesn't quite have the concept
(or ability) of jumping down.

Black History Month

2011-02-05T00:02:00.005-06:00

Every week I receive an email from Relevant Magazine. I'm a subscriber to the bi-monthly publication, so I guess that entitles me to a weekly email. The emails usually contain content from the magazine, as well as some other stuff. Most of it gets my blood boiling a bit, and I've posted about some of these instances here and here. It's a mostly liberal publication (politically and theologically speaking), and really the only reason I stay subscribed to the magazine is so that I can stay up to date on Christian pop culture (whatever that is). Or, I guess you could say that I'm trying to stay "relevant" (although that is very low on my list of concerns in life).

Anyway, the most recent weekly email from Relevant Magazine featured this article from Dr. Tony Evans on a Christian perspective on black history month, which is this month. The article is entitled, "Why Black History Month Matters." The author notes a common question asked by many, even in evangelical circles: "Do we really need a black history month?"

Dr. Evans' article had what I thought were some really great points about black history month, diversity, and unity. But before I go any further, I must confess that I was heretofore totally unacquainted with Dr. Evans, his writing, or his ministry. And not being familiar with the man or his beliefs, I wasn't about to fully align myself with him or endorse his beliefs. A quick Google search revealed that his radio ministry is broadcast on over 400 radio stations across the country. I was encouraged by a look at his website, which advocated church (rather than government) involvement in social issues and holding the word of God as central for providing lasting impact in people's lives. Other than that, I don't know much about the man. So take my endorsements of some of his views presented in this article with a significantly sized grain of salt.

Regarding black history month, Evans says:

God does His best work in the midst of unity. In fact, so essential is the issue of oneness in the church that we are told to be on guard against those who try to destroy it. (Romans 16:17). God has intentionally reconciled racially divided groups into one new man, (Ephesians 2:14-15) uniting them into a new body, (Ephesians 2:16) in order that the church can function as one (Ephesians 2:13). When the church functions as one, we boldly brag on God to a world in desperate need of experiencing Him.

But how do we as a Church function as one? We don’t. He does—both in us and through us.

When we got saved, we were baptized into the body of Christ. No matter what our race, gender, or class is, when each of us came to faith in Jesus, we entered into a new family. We didn’t create God’s family. We became a part of it.

That is so important to realize because far too often we are trying to force unity when authentic unity cannot be mandated or manufactured. Instead, God says we are to “preserve the unity of the Spirit” (Ephesians 4:3). The Holy Spirit has created our unity. It is our job to preserve it.

The reason why we haven’t solved the racial divide in America after hundreds of years is because people apart from God are trying to invent unity, while people who belong to God are not living out the unity that we already possess. The result of both of these situations has been, and will continue to be, disastrous for our nation. Let alone disastrous for the witness of Christ to our nation.

I think there are several good points in these paragraphs. Allow me a chance to tell you what I think they are:

1) All true unity is made possible only through Christ. Any other kind of unity is totally manufactured by the world and will not stand. People are so different that the only way they can truly come together is by supernatural means. This leads to the second point:

2) The diversity and unity of the church is evidence of its divine nature, and this is a strong witness to the world. As Evans says, "When the church functions as one, we boldly brag on God to a world in desperate need of experiencing Him." Think about it for a minute: can you think of any other organization of people that is as diverse as the church but finds unity in itself despite individual differences? I can't. I don't think there is one. The reason this is possible is the commonality of Christ in all believers. The church should be so unified in and through Christ (in the face of individual differences) that the world has to stop and take notice.

3) The unity of the body is God's doing. We don't create unity, God does, because it was he who called us to be a part of his family. Anything else would be manufactured unity. This is what, in my opinion (maybe Evans would disagree with me on this), the world is trying to do with black history month: manufacture unity. It's just not going to happen - not without Christ at the center, and also because human beings are sinful and fallen and have the propensity to be prejudiced against any and everyone. It's also important for Christians to realize this, and not to try and manufacture unity based on the world's system, but instead upon Christ.

4) The church often falls into the trap of trying to manufacture unity by way of worldly means. The body of Christ is not politically correct. Nor does it operate by policies akin to affirmative action. It is neither of these things because the unifying focal point of the church is other-worldly. Unfortunately however, the church sometimes tends to take a man-centered approach to unity and forgets the trans-cultural/ethnic/socio-political nature of the body of Christ.

While I think these are great points, and I would readily affirm them, I part with Evans midway through his article, however. Evans defines "unity" as "oneness of purpose," and says that unity is achieved when different people work toward the same goal(s), and he sees community service and social action as the focal point for achieving unity in the body of Christ. In other words, if the church wants to be unified, it needs to work together through its individual differences to serve the world. To me, that seems to be putting the cart before the horse, and seems to be a type of the "manufactured unity" that Evans warns of. The basic problem that I have with it is that it does not keep Christ as the focus, but rather serving others. Don't get me wrong: I certainly have no qualms about serving others and social action within our communities. But serving the community with people of other ethnicities, classes, religions, or whatever will not produce biblical unity. Only Christ will. Serving the world together is a product of our oneness in Christ, not vice versa. In other words, Christ enables very different people to come together for the sake of the world. Christians do not come together to serve the world for the sake of being united in Christ. There's a huge difference there.

Evans goes on to talk about how, in order to best appreciate the unity we have in Christ, and in order to most efficiently work together for the kingdom of God, we have to know both ourselves and each other. I would offer a hearty "Amen" to this as well, and I would also add that it is the most efficient way for us to love one another as well, and also the best way of guarding unity that the Bible talks about. Evans sees black history month as an ideal way for these realizations to take place. I disagree. In my estimation, the best way for Christians of all ethnic/cultural/socio-political backgrounds is to live with one another and build relationships with each other. Certainly the "black experience" isn't bound up in black history month, nor is the "white experience" bound up in history books. It's personal. It's individual. I think the best way for Christians to move towards unity in Christ while at the same time knowing and understanding our ourselves and others is to simply live with each other and open up some dialogues with our fellow believers. To this end, black or white isn't even the issue. While I may be the same ethnicity as a lot of people in my church, I can guarantee you that we see and experience the world in vastly unique ways, which creates differences, which creates the potential for disunity. But that potential can and is overcome in and through Christ. Yes, it's going to take some humility, some honesty, and maybe even some discomfort, but the progress towards unity in the body will be well worth the effort. Then we can come together in Christ to be a witness to the world.

I don't want to celebrate black history because it's what the world says I should do, or because it's what the world says is acceptable or politically correct. I want to be united because it is Christ who has brought together sinners from every race, culture, and creed on the planet through repentance and faith for the forgiveness of sins - a message that transcends any and every worldly dividing line. To think about unity in any way that does not include Christ is, as Evans says, an attempt to invent unity where none is actually possible.

Perhaps Evans's article was doomed from the start, because any kind of comparison between the world's idea of unity (like designating a particular month of the year to focus on the history of a specific ethnicity) to that of the unity of the church through Christ is a comparison of apples to oranges, if ever there was one.

Touch 'Em All, Gordo

2011-02-03T11:13:00.000-06:00

It seems as though every day I get some new reminder that I am not a kid anymore. Today's reminder comes in the form of John Gordon's announcement that this will be his last year with the Twins radio broadcasting team. 2011 marks Gordo's 70th year of life, and 25th and last season as the play-by-play announcer for the Twins. He shared the job with Herb Carneal for some time, but when Herb died, Gordo took over the main spot, and Dan Gladden became his partner. For my money, the Gordon-Gladden broadcasting combo is about as good as it gets.

What made/makes Gordon great is that he was/is a legitimate baseball fan (let alone a Twins fan). And his broadcasts were so effective precisely because he was a fan, communicating his excitement and love for baseball and the local nine. If nothing else (even if he weren't broadcasting for my local team), he and I could identify with each other on the basis of our love for the game.

My childhood memories are filled with a variety of life-experiences, but there is a common thread that flows through a lot of them. No matter what I was doing, there was usually a Twins game on in the background. There weren't many Twins games on TV back then (as there aren't now - I'm talking about broadcast television), so my family was automatically relegated to listening to the Twins on the radio. As I grew older and listened to more and more Twins games, I came to realize that listening to the games broadcast on the radio was the more desirable way to experience the game, and a lot of that is due to John Gordon.

It was through Carneal and Gordon that I came to know the game of baseball and the Twins players. Yes, the players were the ones who were playing the game, but it was Gordon who made them larger than life in my estimation. Part of this was accomplished just by the way Gordon called the games. His overly dramatic "Swiiiiing, and a miss!" is fantastic, bringing the potential for excitement to each pitch of the game. And of course, the signature "Touch 'em all!" is the stuff of goosebumps. Gordon's call of Kirby Puckett's game 6, 10th inning home run to force a game 7 of the 1991 World Series is absolutely classic. I recently discovered that this call was the only time he has ever repeated the "Touch 'em all" phrase in a single use. I can't listen to that call without almost getting choked up.

When Kirby Puckett died, I was actually pretty torn up. He was my childhood hero. And, like Gordon, a lot of my childhood memories involve Kirby, so for him to die was kind of a shock. John Gordon is the last remaining link to the baseball days of my childhood. Yes, Dan Gladden was a player then and is a broadcaster now, but it's different. Gladden wasn't a broadcaster when I was a kid. He was a player. Gordon has been there throughout my entire love affair with baseball. It's going to be strange to continue my relationship with baseball without Gordon mediating between the two of us.

Now that I'm a dad, one of my favorite things to do is play out in the yard with the kids. This past spring, summer, and fall, almost every evening was spent in the yard, with the Twins game on in the background, and John Gordon's voice bringing us every play. There's just something about baseball on the radio. It's like comfort food. It brings to mind pleasant memories of family and playing with my kids. And in some weird way, John Gordon has been a part of that throughout my life.

Tuesday Happenings

2011-02-02T00:56:00.001-06:00

Today seemed to be a weird day. But as I look back on it, it doesn't seem that weird. It seemed weird as it was happening, though. Here's some of what happened.

1. I had a crazy, pounding headache for most of the day. I don't get headaches that often, so when I do, it's something to take notice of. This one started around 11:00 AM and just kept getting worse and worse as the day went on. It made working difficult, and it didn't help that there was all kinds of demolition going on at the church today. Lots of loud noises plus headache don't usually go together too well. When I left the church around lunch time to go to the post office, the sun reflecting off the snow almost made me puke. I took some Advil around lunch, which I rarely do when I have a headache, and it didn't even make a dent. Around 3:00 PM I went up into one of the loft rooms and tried to lay down and shut my eyes for a while. It didn't really help. I bought some more Advil at around 4:30 and pounded a few more. Still not much relief. And by then I was heading to class.

2. One of my Greek midterms was tonight (I say "one of" because there are actually two midterms for this class, which is kind of weird). Needless to say, the headache didn't help with taking the test. Learning Greek has been a lot easier this time around than it was in college. I seem to be getting the concepts a lot easier this time, and recognizing the patterns of the language also seems to be coming easier. All that being said, I don't think I did too well on the exam. It's interesting, because the teacher lets us use whatever tools, cheats, or helps we want to on the exam (except for an English translation), but it's still very possible (even likely, to some extent) to do poorly. Part of this is, I think, just because the teacher makes the tests harder than the rest of the work (which I think is not the best way to conduct an exam). The test is also timed. All of our other translation work isn't timed, but when it comes to the tests, we find ourselves under the gun, which makes it quite difficult. Oh well. There's still another midterm and a final exam coming.

3. I got an interesting call from my sister this afternoon. More on that some other day.

4. As I was leaving Bethel tonight, The Mrs. called me and asked if I was in the garage. I responded that no, in fact I was just leaving the seminary. She thought that was weird, because from her vantage point in the house, she could see that the light in garage was on. I told her to just lock the doors and I'd be home soon. I couldn't find anything out of the ordinary when I got home. It's a mystery.

5. One of the books I read to my son tonight before bed was called "Diesel 10." It's a Thomas the Train book, but it is really strange. You ever heard about books that were written in English, and then translated into another language, and then translated back into English? Here's a good (and funny) example of what I'm talking about. I'm pretty sure that something like that happened with this Diesel 10 book. It makes absolutely no sense, and the story jumps around all over the place and introduces new characters without ever explaining where they came from. And apparently the Island of Sodor, as well as Thomas and his friends, are now fueled by some magical gold dust taken from the Magical Railway and is endorsed by a man named "Mr. Conductor." Some secret female train named "Lady" (who doesn't appear in the book until the second to last page) is apparently Mr. Conductor's supplier, and she brings him the secret gold dust from the Magical Railway. I'm not making any of this up. I don't think this is what Rev. Awdry had in mind when he wrote his first books.

6. I ended the day by watching a few episodes of River Monsters. This is a great show. We don't have cable, so I've had to rent the seasons. It's overly dramatic fish tales combined with some really weird and scary looking fish. And the host is pretty good, too. It's a bummer the seasons are only seven episodes long.

7. Now it's 1:00 AM, and it's bed time. Good night.

Genesis 39 Passage Map

2011-01-31T01:04:00.003-06:00

I thought this was kind of interesting. For my hermeneutics class, my professor wants us to "map" passages that we exegete. The process basically consists of breaking a text into "scenes" (figuring out where new ideas / actions / dialogues start and stop) and then chart how the "tension" builds and is resolved in the text. Here's my map for Genesis 39, from the Joseph narrative. The numbers represent the verses that make up each scene. The purpose of an exercise like this is to be able to see the smaller parts that make up a whole and to be able to identify any themes or main ideas that might exist within the passage.

Scene 1: Background Information – 1.
Scene 2: The Lord Favors Joseph – 2-6.
Scene 3: Joseph is Pursued by Potiphar’s Wife – 6-7.
Scene 4: Joseph Refuses to Sin Against God – 8-9.
Scene 5: Joseph is Continuously Pursued by Potiphar’s Wife – 10.
Scene 6: Joseph Flees from Potiphar’s Wife – 11-12.
Scene 7: Joseph is Falsely Accused – 13-18.
Scene 8: Joseph is Imprisoned – 19-20.
Scene 9: The Lord Favors Joseph in Prison – 21-23.

Cross-Cultural Definition of Sin

2011-01-30T20:53:00.000-06:00

For those of you who have attended Riverview's "Multicultural Kingdom" Sunday School class this past month, here's a copy of T. Wayne Dye's article "Toward a Cross-Cultural Definition of Sin." After thinking about the class today, I don't think I did a good job of representing the ideas that Dye addresses in his article. For example, I think it's safe to say that Dye is certainly not a relativist, nor does he advocate relativism in the article, so if I gave anyone the impression that the article was promoting relativism, then I certainly didn't represent Dye's position well. So you may be better served to just read the article for yourself. I recommend it. And I hope Dye can explain his position better than I did!

This Too Shall Pass

2011-01-27T21:46:00.001-06:00

Long day today. Actually every Thursday is a long day. It's my marathon school day. This quarter, I'm at Bethel every Thursday for approximately 11 hours. It's one of the busiest times of my life, and it's not only hard because the schedule is full and difficult, but also because my time to be with my family is significantly reduced.

After today's craziness, I decided I want to write out my schedule for today so some day I can look back on it and see how God brought me through it (assuming I don't die from it!).

6:36 AM - Wake up. For some reason, I wake up to Jamie right next to me in bed - naked. I don't know where his pajamas or night time diaper are or why he isn't wearing either of them. Thankfully, the bed's dry. But now that I'm up, so is he.

6:37 - Get ready as fast as I can. I need to be out the door by 7:00.

6:55 - My mom shows up to begin her marathon day of babysitting. Beetz has conferences tonight, so my mom will end up having the kids for about 12 1/2 hours. She's a trooper. It kills me that I won't see my kids until right before they go to bed with them tonight. I keep telling them that someday, they'll have a dad.

7:05 - I'm out the door and on my way to Bethel Seminary.

7:25 - Traffic on the exchange from 35E to 694 West. Apparently the weave hasn't been sufficiently "unweaved." Each time I've been out to the seminary early in the morning, there's been significant slowdowns at that exchange. Today was no different

7:45 - Stop at the local Holiday gas station for a breakfast burrito and a large coffee. I don't usually drink coffee because it tends to upset my stomach, but the early morning and long day ahead of me seem to warrant one.

7:55 - Get to my classroom, pull my computer out, and get ready for class.

8:00 - Class starts.

10:00 - First break of the morning - a 15 minute break, which I spend pacing back and forth in the class room. My back tends to tighten up from sitting in the classroom chairs. Walking seems to help.

11::00 - Break #2, this one's a only a five minute break, which I again spend standing, trying to work out the issues in my back.

12:00 PM - First class of the day ends, and I sprint out to my car (which is parked in the commuter lot, which seems like it's a half-mile away). Once in the car, I begin the five minute drive to leave the Bethel grounds and make my way to Holiday (the same one I went to for breakfast). I get a beef and potato burrito and hop back in the car. I eat the burrito on the way back to campus.

1:00 - Second class of the day begins, more long hours of sitting, and more back pain.

3:00 - First break of this class, a 15 minute one. More walking and staring out the window.

4:05 - Second break of the class, another five minute one, spent standing.

5:00 - Second class of the day ends, and I walk briskly to the vending machines in the lower campus center. I get my "supper" which consists of a bag of Funyuns, two Pop Tarts, and a Dr. Pepper. I sit at a small table and eat. I've only got about five minutes to get to my next and final class of the day: Greek.

5:10 - Get to Greek class and get called on to translate a sentence as soon as I sit down.

7:00 - Greek, the last class of the day, is over. I go and get my coat, and begin the long cold trek back to the commuter lot.

7:35 - I pick up the kids at my mom's and bring them home.

8:00 - I get the kids ready for bed, and let them stay up a little later since we haven't seen each other all day.

9:00 - Relaxing on the computer and blogging about my day. I just keeping telling myself, "After this term, and the next term, and the term after that, there're only two terms left!" Oh goody.

This too shall pass. Someday I'll look back on a day like this and smile. Maybe.

John 1 (JSV - Joel Standard Version)

2011-01-24T13:06:00.004-06:00

OK, here's John 1 in my Greek translation process. See this post and this post for info on the translation processes. I had previously posted John 14 and 15. Why do those before John 1? Because my teacher assigned me those chapters first. So I figured I'd now start at the beginning of the book. As before, sentences that I am not sure of regarding my own translation I have linked to the NASB rendering. Enjoy.

JOHN 1
In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word. He was in the beginning with God. All things through him became, and apart from him became nothing. That which became in him was life, and the life was the light of mankind. And the light in the darkness brought forth, and the darkness did not lay hold.

A man came from God. The name of him was John. This man came in, testifying, in order to be a witness about the light, in order that all believe on account of him. He was not that light, but in order that he might be a witness about the light. That light was the truth, which gave light to all men, came into the world. In the world, he was, and the world through him was made, and the world did not know him. Into his own he came, and his own did not receive him. But as many as took him, he gave them authority to become children of God, those believing in the name of him, who not from blood, not from the will of flesh, not from the will of a man were born, but born from God.

And the word became flesh and lived among us, and we beheld the glory of him, glory as of begotten from the Father, filled with grace and truth.

John bore witness about him and cried out and said, “This is he of whom is said, ‘After me, coming one is greater than me; he became earlier than me.” But because the filling of him we have all partaken, and grace against grace, because the law, through Moses, was given, the grace and the truth through Jesus Christ became. No one has ever seen God, the begotten God, which is in the bosom of the father, that he has explained.

And this is the testimony of John, when sent to him – the Jews from Jerusalem – priests and Levites in order to question him, “Who are you?”

And he agreed and did not deny, and agreed that “I am not the Christ.”

And they questioned him, “Who, therefore? You are Elijah?”

And he said, “I am not.”

“You are the prophet?”

And he answered, “No.”

Therefore they said to him, “Who are [you]? In order that an answer we can give the ones who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”

He said, “I, a voice, crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the road of the Lord, even as he said – Isaiah the prophet.’”

And they were sent from the Pharisees. And they questioned him and said to him, “Why, therefore, are you baptizing if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?”

John answered them, saying, “I baptize in water. In the midst of you is standing one you do not know. Behind me is coming one which not I am weighing, in order that loose of him the sandal unbound. These things, in Bethany became, beyond the Jordan where John was baptizing.

The next day he saw Jesus coming to him, and he said, “Behold the Lamb of God, the one who takes up the sins of the world. This is he in behalf of whom I said, “Behind me is coming a man who in front of me became, because before me he was. And I did not recognize him, but in order that he be made manifest to Israel through this coming, I, in water, am baptizing.

And John bore witness, saying that, “I have seen the Spirit come down as a dove from heaven, and abide on him, and I did not recognize him, but the one who sent me to baptize in water, that one to me said, “Upon he whom you see the Spirit come down and abide upon him, this is one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit. As you see, and bear witness that this is the Son of God.”

On the next day again, John was standing and with two disciples of him, and he looked to Jesus as he was walking. He said, “Behold the Lamb of God.” And they heard, the two disciples of him, what was said, and they followed Jesus.

But Jesus turned and looked upon them following, and he said to them, “Who are you seeking?”

They said to him, “Rabbi (which is to say, teacher), where are you abiding?”

He said to them, “Come and see.”

They came, therefore, and saw where he was abiding, and beside him they abided that day. It was the tenth hour.

Andrew was the brother of Simon Peter – one of the two who heard from John – and followed him. He found this one earlier than his brother Simon, and he said to him, “We have found the Messiah (that is, which means, Christ). He took him to Jesus. Jesus looked to him, and he said, “You are Simon, the son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which is translated, Peter).

The next day he desired to go out into Galilee, and he came upon Philip. And Jesus said to him, “Follow me.”

But Philip was from Bethsaida, from the city of Andrew and of Peter. Philip came upon Nathanael and he said to him, “He whom Moses wrote in the law and the prophets we find, Jesus, son of Joseph from Nazareth.”

And Nathanael said to him, “Is anything good able to come from Nazareth?”

Philip said to him, “Come and see.”

Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him and said about him, “Behold, a true Israelite in whom deceit, there is none.”

Nathanael said to him, “From where do you know me?”

Jesus answered and said to him, “Before Philip called you, you were by the fig tree. I saw you.”

Nathanael said to him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God. You are the king of Israel.”

Jesus answered and said to him, “Because I said that I saw you under the fig tree, you believe? Greater than this you will see.”

And he said to him, “Truly, truly I say to you, you will see the sky open and the angels of God go up and come down upon the Son of Man.”

Thoughts On Jeremiah 33.3

2011-01-22T21:09:00.000-06:00

The most popular song in our house at the moment, (and for the past two years, actually) is "Call to Me," a song put out by Seeds Family Worship. It's a very catchy tune that has for its lyrics the NIV rendering of Jeremiah 33.3: "Call to me and I will answer you, and tell you great and unsearchable things you do not know."

My kids love this song. I've taken to singing with them on my guitar every night before bed, and this is the first song they ask to sing every night. Even Han tries her best to sing the words, and it gets especially cute when she tries to say, "Jeremiah 33.3."

I've been thinking about this verse more in-depth recently, and actually the whole idea of learning verses through songs. While helpful with memory work, learning a verse in the form of a song can tend to rip the verse out of context and make a person think that it means something that the context never even remotely hints at. For example, I hope my kids won't grow up thinking that God will give them great and unsearchable test answers that they do not know! Don't get me wrong - I probably know at least 50 verses by heart from listening to G.T. & the Halo Express when I was a kid, and I really value the fact that I was able to learn those verses through song.

So what are these "great and unsearchable things" God promises to reveal to those who call on him? The seven habits of highly successful people? How to strike it rich? Vast scientific knowledge? Nope. You have to read the verse in context for Jeremiah 33.3 to really make sense.

In chapter 32 Jeremiah relives God's faithfulness to the nation of Israel throughout the ages. This reminiscing is in stark contrast to the fact that God is in the process of meting out severe judgement against Judah. But while this just judgment is taking place, God is talking about restoration: the restoration of his people and their land, and the bringing of both back into his good graces. So then, what are the great and unsearchable things you do not know?" God's plan of salvation through repentance and faith.

But this is something the sinner under judgment can't "know." If you think about it, the sinner - only concerned with himself - has no need for forgiveness or restoration, because he doesn't believe he has done anything wrong. In fact, the sinner is not able to "know" salvation through repentance and faith because the gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing. Presumably, those in Judah didn't "know" about these things because they were so blinded by their own sins that they couldn't see the will of God (although they certainly saw enough of it to justify their punishment).

Sometimes it takes judgment to be able to see these things. God's goodness contrasted against man's sinfulness can prove to be a serious wake up call. In most cases, it takes judgment (or knowledge of impending judgment) for sinners to call out to God. It's only when a person realizes how worthy they are of God's judgment that they are open to hearing about how to escape judgment and be restored. Put simply, you won't care about a Savior unless you know you need to be saved.

God was telling the people of Judah to call out to him while they were in sin so he could tell them great and unsearchable things they did not know: restoration and forgiveness. They certainly had no knowledge of these things while they were in sin. In order to learn about them, they had to call out to God.

It's so cool that God has put this verse in the hearts of my kids, and that they love it so much. They have no idea what it means at this point in their lives, but I pray they will. It's so vitally essential. My kids, like the people of Judah, are in sin and need to call out to God, and he will be faithful to tell them of the way of salvation - the "great and unsearchable things" they do not know.

A Breath of Fresh Air

2011-01-20T10:08:00.000-06:00

Last week I whined about some aspects of my seminary experience thus far. There have been good points and bad points. I also said how I transferred out of my advanced placement hermeneutics class. Well, the class I transferred into has been great (after a grand total of 2 hours of class time)! I think the difference has to do with my professor. Thanks, Dr. Vogt, for your balanced, fair way of presenting the material. And thanks, Dr. Moritz, for telling me that Dr. Vogt was probably the most conservative teacher in the hermeneutics department.

Psalm 16

2011-01-19T17:15:00.000-06:00

This psalm seems appropriate for today (or any day, for that matter, but especially today):

Preserve me, O God, for in you I take refuge. I say to the LORD, "You are my Lord; I have no good apart from you." As for the saints in the land, they are the excellent ones, in whom is all my delight.

The sorrows of those who run after another god shall multiply; their drink offerings of blood I will not pour out or take their names on my lips.

The LORD is my chosen portion and my cup; you hold my(H) lot. The lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; indeed, I have a beautiful inheritance.

I bless the LORD who gives me counsel; in the night also my heart instructs me. I have set the LORD always before me; because he is at my right hand, I shall not be shaken.

Therefore my heart is glad, and my whole being[e] rejoices; my flesh also dwells secure. For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.

You make known to me the path of life; in your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore.

Our Exciting Day

2011-01-15T22:11:00.000-06:00

It's 9:36 PM right now, and it's been a long day. Last night at about 7:30 PM, our Bible study group was just leaving our house. Our kids really look forward to Fridays because all of our friends come over with all their kids, and a lot of playing and craziness ensues. By the time everyone was leaving, Betsy was holding the Hanburger as we were starting to get ready for bed, and Betsy noticed that Hannah seemed warm. She took her temperature and it came back at 101. We didn't think that much of it (Ferg had been just a little sick during the week). That night, about 2:00 AM, Hannah woke up crying and coughing. Betsy went into her room, and Hannah proceeded to cough/throw up a lot of phlegm. Betsy gave her a nebulizer treatment, and she fell right back to sleep. At about 6:00 AM, Hannah woke up again doing the same thing, except this time her cough was a lot worse. She coughed up a lot of phlegm again. What was happening was she was coughing up a lot of phlegm into her throat which caused her to gag, and she ended up kind of gagging out a lot of gross yellow stuff. It was not a pleasant thing to watch or listen to as it happened.

By 9:00 AM this morning, Beetz and I felt she should be seen, so Betsy took her to an urgent care center. They said she probably had croup, and maybe pneumonia. They prescribed steroids for the croup and an antibiotic for the supposed pneumonia (I say "supposed" because it turns out she doesn't have pneumonia, which makes me wonder why they would prescribe her medicine without knowing what she had).

Anyway, I went to get some things done at the church while the kids were down for nap (1:00 PM). I had quite a bit to do today to get ready for the "big show" on Sunday. Also, we had arranged to buy 1/4 of a cow and I was scheduled to pick up my share of the beef this afternoon. By 1:30, Betsy called me and said she was ready to call 911. Han's breathing had become very irregular and labored. I could actually hear her wheezing in the background as I talked to Betsy on the phone. I told Betsy not call 911 yet, and that I was coming home, and that we could take her to the ER. So I left the beef and started driving home. On my way home, Betsy called me again and said she really thought we should call 911. Hannah's breathing was very labored, and she couldn't seem to get any breath. So we called 911 and the ambulances came right away.

By the time they arrived, Jamie had awoken from his nap. I tried to reassure him by telling him to look at the cool trucks that had come to our house. We just told him that Hannah was sick and needed to see the doctor, which he seemed to be OK with. The paramedics wanted to bring Hannah to the hospital to get her some treatment, and we agreed. As Betsy and Hannah got into the ambulance, I had Jamie look out the window to watch the trucks. At some point, he caught on to the seriousness of the situation, because as Betsy and Han were getting into one of the ambulances, he watched and screamed "Hannah! Hannah Jane!" It was incredibly touching to see how much he cared for his little sister and was concerned for her well-being. What a great big brother.

The hospital confirmed the diagnosis of croup, and added that it was a pretty serious case. Each time they medicated her for the croup her breathing improved, but once the medicine wore off it became labored again. The doctors decided that Hannah needed to stay at the hospital to be monitored. The medication wasn't "sticking," so keeping her in the hospital seemed the smart thing to do.

So that's where she is right now. Betsy is with her at the hospital, and Jamie and I are at home. I was able to tell him that Mom and Han are having a sleepover at the hospital, and he seemed OK with that. I wish we could have taken him to see her, but the hospital doesn't allow visitors under five years old for fear of spreading germs, which is understandable.

Han's cough is still really bad, and she's still gagging on a lot of phlegm. She's pretty uncomfortable. Every time she coughs you can tell she's in a lot of pain. It sounds as if someone has replaced her throat with two pieces of 60 grit sandpaper and they're rubbing together every time she coughs (in fact, when the doctor came into the room for the first time, Han coughed, and she said, "That's a croup cough! Where are my med students? They should be here, because that's a textbook croup cough.")

All in all, it's been an interesting day. I've never had to take one of my kids to the hospital in an emergency situation before. I've never had to watch one of them struggle to breath before. It makes a parent feel powerless, but it turns out that's the perfect place to be.

Ready to be Done

2011-01-14T14:03:00.002-06:00

OK, I've been in seminary for three years now, and I'm ready to be done. Today marked my first full day of classes for the winter quarter at Bethel Seminary. For this term, I'm continuing on in my Greek studies (with the same professor I had last quarter), I started an advanced placement hermeneutics class (advanced placement because I've already done graduate level hermeneutics, but Bethel won't acknowledge my credits from Sioux Falls seminary as being satisfactory in this area), and an Old Testament History course (which I've also already done at Sioux Falls, but the same thing applies in this area as well - not full credit). It's been a long, challenging road, and I think I'm beginning to see the pinhole that is the light at the end of my seminary tunnel. It can't come quick enough.

There have been many reasons why seminary has been challenging. The biggest one has been the effect it's had on my family. Going to school requires a lot of time away from family spent studying and going to classes. When I was going to school at Sioux Falls this was less of an issue because I was taking classes online. Now that I'm at Bethel, I'm gone for 3 hours one night of the week, and all day on another day of the week (which happens to be my day off from work!). Then pretty much every night after the kids go to bed I'm either doing school work or catching up on my regular work until I go to bed. It's a grueling schedule. Throw into the mix trying to maintain a marriage, and it gets even more difficult.

The reason for having to transfer from Sioux Falls to Bethel was because the Association of Theological Schools (the organization that accredits schools like Sioux Falls and Bethel) requires students to take a certain number of credits in an on-campus setting, all for the sake of establishing community. I think this is a bogus reason, though, and it should be re-examined by the ATS. For someone in my situation (working full time in ministry, married with kids, etc.) I've got all the community I need. I'm connected with the people at my church; I'm connected with my family and close friends. I don't need yet another network of people to interact with and get to know. That sounds rude, but consider this: in forcing me to take classes on-campus for the sake of the "community of learning" that exists there, I am forced to sacrifice the community relationships I already have (family, church, etc.). So in insisting on their community, these restrictions do damage to the existing communities I'm already a part of. Kind of ironic.

Another reason I'm ready to be done with seminary is that I am beginning to become disenfranchised with the academic establishment. Higher education should be a free marketplace of ideas, where all views and ideas are given equal consideration. And in my experience at Sioux Falls and Bethel, both schools have confessed an ideology such as this one. The reality has been significantly different, however. I have found that most professors are more interested in a closed marketplace of ideas that consists of the his or her ideas and not much else. But still, these same professors claim to be open to anything. It's rather dishonest. In many cases, the actual classroom environment that exists is one of condemning the traditional (and often times conservative) view and belittling those who adhere to it.

This was the case in my advanced placement hermeneutics course I just started yesterday. I couldn't have felt any lower, sitting in that class. I was basically told that everything I think is wrong, and that I don't care about hermeneutics or good methods of interpretation. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have good reason to believe the things that I believe, and I think I can provide an adequate case for the validity of my beliefs. And if one of my views is challenged and found wanting, I'm willing to change it or adopt a different view. But the professor presented my views in such an uneven-handed way, and he made people who subscribe to those views look so ignorant, that I just kept my mouth shut (for the most part - I did comment at a few junctures). The difficult thing for students who find themselves with a different view than the professor's is that the professor has had years and years to study and perfect his view, while the student has probably only thought about the matters superficially at the least, or maybe done a small amount of study on the matter at the most. This makes for a pretty unfair intellectual fight. So the student usually submits to the professor's superior knowledge on the subject, and thus the closed marketplace of ideas takes over.

In the case of my hermeneutics class, after the class was over, I left the room and walked straight to the registrar's office and dropped the class. I can't take it. It's not that I can't take the opposing viewpoints or arguments, or that I can't handle the academic demands of the course, but rather that I can't stomach the idea of sitting in that kind of environment for the next 10 weeks.

I'm also sick of a lot of professors whose theology and/or ecclesiology turns into liberal social commentary, and then insisting that such theology/sociology is the norm of Christians and/or scripture, and then basing grades on the students' conformity to those beliefs. While I was at Sioux Falls, I respectfully refused to complete an assignment because I couldn't do it in good conscience. The assignment had to do with conforming the student's ministry to that of Shane Claiborn, which I could not do in good conscience. Thankfully the professor acknowledged my objection and let me complete the assignment using different material. But the problem remains: don't base my grades on your own political ideologies.

Don't get me wrong: I have no problem with spirited debate or disagreement. In fact, some times its necessary. But those exchanges need to be done respectfully and with open minds - on both sides of the argument. The students and professors need to approach disagreements in the same way.

I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge the very positive parts of my seminary experience too. Along with all the bad professors and bad experiences I've had, I've also had a lot of good ones. My current Greek prof is maybe the best professor I've had in seminary so far. He's a great guy, he loves what he's teaching, and he loves what he's doing. It's a real pleasure to be learning from him. My systematic theology prof at Sioux Falls was also a great guy. He and I had a number of significant theological disagreements, but we were able to treat each other with respect and friendship. I talked to him on the phone before I left Sioux Falls (he was also my faculty advisor) and he told me that our relationship had "ministered" to him. That's what the educational experience in a Christian institution should be like: our disagreements with and challenges to one another should result in edification. Some profs get this, and some don't. Actually, most don't (at least in my experience).

Vladimir Kharlamov was also a great teacher. He gave you nothing but straight up lectures, but he was good. And he was open. The most fascinating lecture I've ever heard (about the Counter Reformation) was in his class. My New Testament prof at Sioux Falls was also a great encouragement to me.

I think the key to a successful and enjoyable seminary experience is humility, and humility all around. Professors need to humble themselves; they don't know everything. And just because they're really smart doesn't mean they're always right. Students need to humble themselves. They will encounter new ideas that seem strange and wrong, but intellectual honesty requires a sincere examination of opposing points of view.

The theme of the rest of my seminary experience is going to be Philippians 4.13. I'm not in literal chains, but sometimes it feels like it.

Lecrae and Trip Lee Interview

2011-01-09T23:38:00.000-06:00

“…with this resurgence of reformed teaching and thinking…there hasn’t been very many genres of music that articulated the robust theology and passion for Jesus, and hip hop has been a perfect vehicle for it.”

Amen to that.

If you don't know who these guys are, they're worth taking a listen to here, and then go buy there stuff on iTunes. It's innovative music, and it's preaching the gospel with no punches pulled. Really good stuff. Even if hip hop's not your thing (it isn't really my thing, but these guys are really good).

Justin Taylor Interview: Lecrae Moore and Trip Lee from Crossway on Vimeo.

Trusting God

2011-01-09T14:38:00.004-06:00

I had the opportunity to preach the message at this morning's worship service at Riverview. Pastor Wick was out of town, and I was happy to fill in for him.

The text I chose to preach on was Joshua 11.1-9. I've posted about this text before, but I've been thinking about it a lot, and hence decided to preach on it when I got the chance.

I think the main message of the narrative is to trust God, and that we don't need things in life like horses and chariots because we have God. One of the points in my sermon is that we tend to trust God only to an extent, and we usually have a backup plan just in case God doesn't come through for us. The only problem with this line of thinking is that having a backup plan is not complete and absolute trust. It's only partial trust. We sometimes don't trust God to provide for us, so we tend to take matters into our own hands...just in case.

My biblical example of this was 1 Chronicles 18.4. David acquires 1,000 horses and chariots by way of winning a battle, and he decides that he trusts God enough to hamstring 900 of the horses and leave 100 horses to be used with chariots...just in case. Why not hamstring all 1,000 horses? Why leave 100 left over? I think it was so he had an insurance plan, just in case God didn't come through for him. Did David trust God? Yes, but not totally. For whatever reason, David felt that he needed a backup plan.

Now, I've been thinking about something that didn't make it into my sermon (I didn't include it in the sermon because I didn't want to cause confusion, or leave any matters unresolved): if we are supposed to trust God for everything, how do Christians justify things like insurance or retirement accounts? Why don't we say, "I am trusting God to keep me healthy. And if I do get sick, I will trust God to find a way to cover my medical costs." And why don't we ever say, "I am not going to save or invest for retirement. I will trust God to give me what I need to live, and I will invest the money I would have saved for retirement into the kingdom now." If we believe that God will provide and care for us, and supply all our needs according to his riches in glory, then couldn't someone suggest that the same should apply for things like insurance and retirement savings?

There are two answers to this question, I think. Here's what I would say: 1) Yes. We should trust God with things like our health, covering health care costs, and retirement savings. For some, it could definitely be a matter of conviction, and they should do as the Spirit leads. I know a couple from our church who recently canceled their health insurance for this very reason. They felt convicted that having health insurance was detracting from their total dependence upon God. For them, canceling their health insurance was the right thing to do. I totally support them in their decision. In fact, their faith is an encouragement to me.

2) The second way I would answer this is that we could say that things like insurance and investing for retirement are God's means of providing for us. In this sense, we trust God by using the methods that he has so graciously provided to us.

Either way you look at it, it's got to be a personal decision that comes as a result of much prayer and searching of the scriptures. For some, it would be a sin to depend on insurance and retirement saving. For others, not so much. I, myself hold a life insurance policy worth a significant amount of money. I feel that God has provided my family with this policy as a way of providing for my family if I were to die. That being said, I am not currently saving for retirement, nor do I plan to start, unless God were to change my thinking dramatically (Is there a conflict there? Maybe. After all, what is saving for retirement if not an insurance policy? I need to ask God to show me what to do with that.). Personally, I feel that doing so would violate my trust in God's provision. I also think there are much better things I could be doing with my money besides putting it away for a period of my life that is far from guaranteed. I may not even live to retirement, so why save money for something I don't even know is going to happen (I think there's some biblical support for this line of thinking, too)? But that's just me. And I don't think that I can universally apply that line of thinking to all Christians. Nor can my friends at church tell other people that they need to cancel their medical insurance or they're not trusting God. God is a personal God, who deals with all people individually where they're at.

What it really boils down to is all Christians humbling themselves, searching the scriptures, and determining for themselves - with the Spirit's guidance - what trusting God looks like for them. For some people it may be no medical insurance; for others it may mean not saving for retirement; for some it might mean giving half of their paycheck to the church; for still others it might mean having a mother quit her job to stay home and homeschool her kids while her husband goes to work to provide. Who knows? If you want to know how you can trust God more, just ask him, and be open to how he will lead. It might not be easy, but it will definitely be worth it. And God is certainly trustworthy enough for you to cast your cares on him.

John 15 (JSV - Joel Standard Version)

2011-01-03T16:04:00.001-06:00

Here's another installment in my Greek translation adventures. One interesting thing about translating is that the translator gets to decide where to put the periods and paragraph breaks. This is true with my translation as well. The translator tries to follow the flow of the author's thought and then translate it accordingly.

Also, I tried something a bit different this time. I've linked sentences or phrases where I was unsure of a good translation to the NASB rendering of the verse or sentence. I didn't use an English translation as a guide at all on this chapter, so some sections are undoubtedly a little rough (hopefully not heretical!).

One final comment: my classmates and I have joked about how a literal translation makes it sound as if Yoda from Star Wars was doing the talking. While this is kind of funny, I actually find it to be helpful in my translation process. The order in which words are placed in a sentence does not matter in the Greek language (at least to some extent), so a literal English translation usually sounds like Yoda (see this post for more on the Yoda-speak).

JOHN 15

“I myself am the true vine and the Father of me is the vinedresser. Every branch in me not bearing fruit, he removes it, and every fruit that is bearing, he prunes it in order that more fruit it may bear. Already clean, you are, through the word which I have spoken to you. You abide in me and I in you. Even as the branch is not able to bear fruit of itself when it does not dwell in the vine, so neither you, when not in me you are dwelling. I myself am the vine, you are the branches. The one who dwells in me and I in him, this one bears much fruit, since apart from me you are not able to do anything. If anyone does not abide in me he is cast outside, as the branch is withered and they are gathered and in the fire are thrown and are burned. If you dwell in me and the words of me in you abide, whatever you want, you will ask, and it will be done to you. In this is glorified the Father of me, in order that fruit – much you will bear – and you will become my disciples. As you loved the Father of me, and I you loved, abide in the love of me. If the commandments of me you are keeping, you will abide in the love of me, as I the Father’s commandments have kept and I abide in him in his love.

“These things I spoke to you in order that joy in you is, and the joy of you may be full. This is my commandment, that you love one another, even as I loved you. Greater than this love no one has, that someone, the life of him he lay down in behalf of the friends of him. You are the friends of me if you do that which I command you to. No longer I say you are servants, since the servant does not know what he is doing – the master. But you I have called friends, because all things which I heard about the Father of me I made known to you.

“You did not choose me, but I chose you and I appointed you in order that you should go and bear fruit, and the fruit of you may remain, that anything you may ask the Father in the name of me he may give to you. These things I am commanding to you, in order that you love one another.

“If the world is hating you, you know that me first of you it has hated. If out of the world you were, the world would love its own, but since out of the world you are not, I chose you from the world. On account of this the world hates you.

“Remember the word that I myself said to you: a servant is not greater than the master of him. If me they persecuted, also you they will persecute. If the word of me they kept, also yours they will keep. But all these things they will do to you on account of the name of me, because they do not know the one who sent me. If not I came and spoke to them, sin not they have. But now an excuse not they have about the sins of them. The one who hates me, also the Father of me he hates. If the works not I did in them which no one else has done, sin not they have. But now they have seen and have hated both me and the Father of me. But in order that the word may be fulfilled in the law of them that is written that they have hated me without cause.

“When comes the helper whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth from the Father proceeds. That one will testify about me. And you also testify, because from the beginning with me you are.”

A Prayer for 2011

2011-01-01T14:44:00.002-06:00

The Valley of Vision offers this prayer as a way of looking back to what God has done in the past year, and what he will do in the year to come.

O Love Beyond Compare, thou art good when thou givest, when thou takest away, when the sun shines upon me, and when night gathers over me. Thou hast loved me before the foundation ofthe world, and in love didst redeem my soul. Thou dost love me still, in spite of my hard heart, ingratitude, and distrust. Thy goodness has been with me during another year, leading my through a twisting wilderness, in retreat helping me to advance, when beaten back making sure headway.

Thy goodness will be with me in the year ahead; I hoist sail and draw up anchor, with thee as the blessed pilot of my future as of my past. I bless thee that thou hast veiled my eyes to the waters ahead. If thou hast appointed storms of tribulation, thou wilt be with me in them. If I have to pass through tempests of persecution and temptation, I shall not drown. If I am to die, I shall see thy face the sooner. If a painful end is to be my lot, grant me grace that my faith fail not. If I am to be cast aside from the service I love, I can make no stipulation. Only glorify thyself in me whether in comfort or trial, as a chosen vessel meet always for thy use.

AMEN.

John 14 (JSV - Joel Standard Version)

2010-12-27T13:45:00.000-06:00

Back in 2005 I took undergraduate level Greek for my ministry degree. Now that I'm in seminary (and since I didn't keep up with my Greek studies after my first go), I'm taking Greek again. I've finished the first class, and I begin the second phase of my Greek studies on January 11. The first class ended on December 9, so my professor assigned us to read John 14-17 in Greek during the Christmas break. Before this, I had been working on translating the gospel of John from the beginning. I've already completed chapter 1 and had made a significant way through chapter 2 by the time break started. I've been translating chapter 14 during the break, and I finished it today. The translation is below.

Before you read my translation, however, know this: I'm still a relative beginner at the Greek language. My translation is choppy (partially because I want it choppy - I want to get the nitty-gritty translation; a formalized rendering would come later and with more study). There will be places where the translation reads like, "In the name of me" or "in the heart of you," or something similar. This is partly because that's the way the Greek language works. Again, in modern translations, translators will change "In the name of me," to the easier to read, "In my name," for the sake of the reader. I have not done this. My translation is pretty bare-bones.

Also, there are some parts of the Greek text that really confuse me, and I wasn't 100% sure how to translate what I read in the Greek. For these instances, I just went with whatever the NASB had, and worked my best guess to align with the NASB, although I tried not to do this as much as possible. You may want to compare the NASB and my own translation. Additionally, there are still many Greek words and tenses that I am not familiar with, so I got help from this really cool site. Any words, phrases, or sentences that I wasn't sure of a good translation are in italics. Enjoy.

JOHN 14

“Do not let the hearts of you be troubled. You believe in God and in me you believe. In the house of the Father of me are many mansions. But if not, I told you that I am going to prepare a place for you? And if I go and I prepare a place for you, again I am coming and I will take you all to myself, in order that where I am, I and you may be. And where I myself am going, you know the way.”

Thomas says to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How do we know the way?”

Jesus says to him, “I myself am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one is coming to the Father if not through me. If you had known me, and the Father of me, …you know him and have seen.”

Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.”

Jesus said to him, “So long a time with you I am and you are not knowing me, Philip? The one seeing me is seeing the Father. How are you saying, 'show us the Father?' You are not believing that I in the Father, and the Father is in me? The words which I myself am saying to you of myself…but the Father in me who dwells is doing the works of him. Believe me, that I am in the Father and the Father in me. But if not, on account of the works, believe. Truly, truly, I say to you, the one who believes in my works which I do, he will also do, and greater than these he will do, because I to the Father am going. And anything which you ask in the name of me, this I will do, in order that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If anything you may ask me in the name of me, this I will do.

“If you are loving me, the commandments of me you will watch over. And I will ask the Father, and another helper he will give you, in order that he is with you for eternity, the Spirit of truth, which the world is not able to receive, because it does not see him, neither does it know him. You know him because with you he dwells and in you he is. I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you. Yet a while and the world will see me no more, but you see me, because I live and you will live. In that day you will know that I in the Father of me, and you in me, and I in you. He who has the commandments of me and who keeps these, is he who loves me. But he who loves me will be loved by the Father of me, and I will love him and will manifest to him myself.”

Judas, not Iscariot, says to him, “Lord what has happened that to us you are going to manifest yourself and not to the world?”

Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves me, the word of me he will guard, and the Father of me will love him and to him we will come, with him an abode we will make. The one not loving me, the words of me he is not keeping, and the word which you are hearing is not mine but the Father who sent me.

“I have spoken this to you, remaining beside you, but the helper, the Holy Spirit, which the Father will send in the name of me, he will teach you things and he will remind you all which I said to you.

“Peace I am leaving with you; the peace of me I give to you. Not as the world is giving do I give to you. Do not let the heart of you be troubled, nor let it be cowardly. You heard that I said to you: ‘I go and I am coming to you.’ If you loved me you rejoiced because I go to the Father, because the Father is greater than me. And now I have told you before it is to happen, in order that when it happens will you believe. No longer will I speak much with you, for he is coming, the ruler of the world. And he has nothing in me, but in order that the world may know that I love the Father, and even as the Father commanded me, this I do. Rise up and let us go from here.”

A Cheery "Holiday Message"

2010-12-26T21:52:00.000-06:00

Here's a cheery "holiday message" from comedian Ricky Gervais. Apparently he's an ardent atheist, and he's got a beef with anyone who holds to a particular faith (although he tries to speak generally against all faiths, he's obviously coming down on Christians the most). If you've never heard of Gervais before, that's not surprising. The only movie that I know of that he's appeared in was "The Invention of Lying," which left much to be desired, both dramatically and as far as comedy is concerned. He's also the mind behind the TV show, "The Office," or at least the British version of The Office. I'm not sure if he's involved in the American version. Anyway, it looks like Ricky is using the Christmas holiday as a means of furthering his atheist agenda.

After reading Gervais's article I only have one thought, and it's one that I've said before, and one that I'll say again now, and will probably say again many more times in the future: atheists need some new ideas. They keep coming back to the table with the same old things that have already been answered before, answered again, and answered one more time for good measure. It's getting old. I was going to write a response to the article and Gervais's thoughts, but it's been done before, a million times.

To Santa, Or Not To Santa?

2010-12-25T21:46:00.000-06:00

My wife and I recently made a decision for our household: we're not going to "do" Santa with our kids. We've kind of waffled on whether or not to tell our kids about Santa Claus for the past 2 years (as long as one of them has been old enough to care), and we've finally decided not to do it.

A large part of our reasoning for making a firm decision on it at this point in time has to do with this video that we recently saw. It's a video of John Piper talking about how he celebrated Christmas with his kids when they were young. Not that John Piper is the authority on all things Christmas or how to celebrate it, but I think he brings up some great points. Check it out.

One of his best points, I think, is that Santa is poor substitute for Christ. I often hear people say around this time of year, "Jesus is the reason for the season." Why do we need to be reminded of that? Because, in this society, Santa (and the materialism he represents) has become, at least to some extent, a substitute for Christ. I don't want to be a part of that, and I don't ever want my kids to think that Christmas is about anything other than Christ.

When it comes down to it, the celebration of the Christmas holiday is a fantastic way to illustrate the incarnation - we give each other gifts to remind us of the gift that was given to us by God: Christ. I want this to be the focus of our family's Christmas celebration - not Santa, or even the giving of the gifts themselves. It'd be hard to make that point by saying that Santa is the instrument by which God gives us gifts to remind us of his gift of Christ! Especially when it comes time to tell the kids the truth about Santa.

Now, before anyone thinks I'm a total fundamentalist humbug, let me say that I have nothing against Santa Claus or families who choose to tell their kids that he is the one who brings them gifts. It is not my intention to condemn anyone who "does" Santa (if that were my intention, I would have to condemn my own parents, who perpetuated the Santa myth with me until my sister ruined it for me one night at the tender age of 9, which totally crushed me, I might add; I would also have to condemn my sister and brother-in-law, which I'm not prepared to do). I think "doing" Santa can be done while still maintaining the spiritual element of Christmas. I also think that celebrating Christmas without Santa can still miss the whole point of the holiday as well. It's not as though Santa is some magic ingredient that either must or must not be added for the holiday to have any meaning. That is up to those who celebrate it, and it's why Christmas can still be spiritually celebrated, even with Santa. We've just decided not to do it.

The ABC's of Christmas

2010-12-19T21:07:00.000-06:00

Here's a video of the "The ABC's of Christmas" from Riverview's kids Christmas program, which took place tonight:

It's the first time The Ferguson (my son) has been a part of something like this. He originally wasn't going to be in it (he's only 3 after all!), but one of the kids who was originally scheduled to recite a line dropped out, and so we decided to see if he could do it. The issue wasn't whether or not he could memorize the line. He's memorized Bible verses and books before, so that wasn't a problem. The main concern was whether or not he would freak out when he got in front of all those people during the program.

Things weren't looking good when, during the first rehearsal he participated in, it came time for his line. When it was his turn, he smiled, ran to his mom's side, and immediately bawled his eyes out, never saying his line. But after working with him a bit more at home, and trying to calm his nerves, he eventually got so saying the line in front of people was no problem. I still thought it was a toss-up though, as to whether or not he'd be able to do it when push came to shove. For this reason, we had his oldest cousin (who stood right next to him in line), memorize his part as well, just in case he had a melt down when it came to him.

Thankfully he did great. Although there were some technical issues, as his head hit the microphone and it made a few very loud popping noises. He was unflappable, though. He kept right on going.

Proud papa over here!

More On Caleb

2010-12-15T23:20:00.000-06:00

In this earlier post I talked about why I thought Caleb was such a cool guy, especially in his later years of life. In short, he was an 85 year old man who had no qualms about going into a land filled with giants, as long as God was with him.

After doing the reading and study for this week's men's Bible study, I like the guy all the more. In Joshua 15 we read about what happened after the 85 year old Caleb entered the land of giants: he drove them all out, just like he said he would. And then after he was done with them, he went on to another town and drove them out too. He was then free to bless his children and family members with sections of good land. What a cool story. It's a great testimony about what is possible when one believes and trusts God.

The story gets even better, though, because it's contrasted with other stories about stronger, younger people who couldn't do what Caleb did. Why not? Because they lacked faith.

Later in Joshua 15 we read about the tribe of Judah, who, after they had received the inheritance of land that was given to them, wasn't able to drive out the Jebusites, and was then forced to make them into laborers and servants. Similarly, in Joshua 16, the Manassites couldn't drive out the Canaanites from their land, and they had to take them as laborers as well. Finally, in Joshua 17, the tribes of Joseph (the Manassites and Ephraimites) were too afraid to go and drive people out of the land that had been given to them.

What happened with these tribes? Did they forget that as long as God was with them, and as long as they were following his commands, that they would be successful? Apparently so. Up to this point, Israel had only been defeated in battle once, and it was because they were trusting in themselves and not in God. They were also forced to take the Gibeonites as laborers instead of wiping them out from the land that was rightfully theirs because they failed to consult God on the matter. But when Israel trusted and followed God, they were absolutely unstoppable - even against horses, chariots, and armies whose soldiers were as numerous as the sand on the seashore. But now there are these three tribes (actually 2 1/2 tribes) that suddenly find themselves to be too wimpy to do what must be done. What happened?

What's interesting is that when the tribes of Joseph complain to Joshua that they don't have enough land, and that the land they want is occupied by foreigners, Joshua seems to say, "So what? Go get 'em? They're in your land? Then go kick them out!" Why does Joshua react this way? I think it's because he knows that all things are possible with God, and if the tribes of Joseph would trust God, getting rid of these people wouldn't be a problem (which is exactly what Caleb thought when he marched into the land of giants).

Caleb did what these other tribes failed to do: trust God and act in faith. And it's even more remarkable since Caleb was 85 at the time and had far fewer soldiers than any of the tribes did. Caleb didn't have to take any laborers or slaves, or be responsible for more mouths to feed. He trusted God - even when that trust seemed to go against all reason - what chance did an 85 year old with just his family to fight with him have against giants? All the chance in the world, because God was fighting for him.

It goes to show how easily and quickly we can forget God's faithfulness to us, and that we can always trust in him. I want to be like Caleb.

Should I Be Mad About This?

2010-12-11T15:01:00.000-06:00

Each winter since my wife and I moved into our current location, I have always been frustrated with the city snow plows. We live on one of the "main" streets in our city, and it gets a lot of traffic, which usually means it's first on the list for having the snow plowed which is usually nice - our street is almost always clear. And like a good citizen, I always make sure my sidewalks are shoveled/snow-blown within a day of a snowfall.

Here's the problem: the sidewalk in front of my house is separated from the street by the usual 3-4 foot wide boulevard section of grass. I'm not sure if the snow plows are either going so fast, or not watching what they're doing, or whatever, but whenever a snow plow plows our street, it throws all the snow from the street onto our sidewalk. And most of the time, it's AFTER I've already been out to shovel/snow-blow. So then I have to go out and shovel/snow-blow one more time.

Why not just wait to shovel/snow-blow until after the plows have gone by, you ask? Because "street snow" is much different than "sidewalk snow." It's usually wetter and heavier (which stinks for shoveling), or it's icy and chunky (which my snowblower can't handle). I find it hard to believe that the ONLY way the snow plows can do their job is to throw street snow onto my sidewalk.

I've told my wife that if I was ever outside while a snow plow was doing this, I was going to flag him down and explain my predicament to him. That day came today. A plow was going by my house and I flagged him down. Somewhat to my surprise, he stopped and rolled down his window. I asked him if he and his compatriots could slow down while plowing so I don't have to re-shovel/blow my sidewalk every time they plow. His response was that the snow was so light that he couldn't control where it went, and that it didn't matter if he was going fast or not. I replied by saying something like, "OK. It just sucks that I always have to shovel my sidewalk twice." He tried to encourage me by saying that he was going to have to plow twice, too. Ok, but that's not the point.

Here's the point: the city of South Saint Paul requires that I clear my sidewalk of snow within 12 hours of a snow fall, or face a fine. If I comply with those standards, doesn't it seem a tad bit stinky of them to throw more snow back onto my sidewalk, forcing me to comply with them again? Would I be fined if I complied with the snow that fell on my sidewalk, but failed to clear the snow that the plows threw on my sidewalk? Most definitely. But the city is the one that put the snow there!

I have no problem with complying with the city's regulations. It just seems that sometimes the city is working against me.

My Dad is an Animal

2010-12-10T21:19:00.000-06:00

Tonight my car died at Little Caesar's. I had stopped to pick up some pizza for our small group Bible study, and when I went back out to my car, I turned the key and nothing happened. I called my wife and she came and picked up the pizzas. Then I called my dad and asked if he could come give me a ride to the auto parts store so I could buy a new battery (I had known the one that I had was going down the tubes, so I was pretty sure that was the problem).

When my dad arrived we decided to try to jump it, just for the nuts of it. But since I had pulled forward into my parking spot, the jumper cables wouldn't reach from the battery in my dad's car to mine, and the front end of my car was facing the sidewalk. My dad said he would go out into the street and drive over the curb in order to be able to reach the cables to my battery. But there was a ton of snow piled up on the curb, so that wasn't going to be an option. The next thing I know, my dad is pulling out of the Little Caesar's parking lot onto the sidewalk that ran in front of my car. While a tad unconventional, it got the job done. I can't imagine what people thought as they were watching him driving on the sidewalk!

Once my car was started again, the next task was to figure out how to get my dad's car off the sidewalk. There were two options: 1) drive over the curb and out into the street, but that would be tough because there was still probably too much snow on the curb to be able to drive over; 2) go out the way he came, backing up back down the sidewalk. So, half on the sidewalk, and half in the snowbank, my dad carefully dodged street lamps, a bus bench, and a garbage can all the way to the end of the parking lot. When he had gotten back into the lot, he looked at me and said, "I don't mean too brag, but I'm not sure how many people could've done that." I agree. It was pretty neat.

I Love This Guy!

2010-12-09T11:04:00.001-06:00

Ever read the story of Caleb? It's a great story. Here's the end of his story.

Caleb was one of twelve guys whom Moses sent to spy out the Promised Land before the Israelites invaded it. And he was one of two of those twelve that returned with a favorable report about the Israelites' chances of taking the land (Joshua being the other). The other ten guys said that there was no way they would be able to take the land that God had promised them because it was filled with giants, and that the people of Israel were essentially doomed to a lifetime of wilderness-wandering. As a result of their unbelief, the current generation of Israelites were forbidden to ever enter the Promised land, EXCEPT for Joshua and Caleb, the two spies who believed that God would be with the people and they could successfully take the land. In fact, the prospect of giants in the land didn't seem to shake either Caleb or Joshua one bit. Why not? Because they knew God would be with them.

So the people of Israel were doomed to wander the wilderness until the unbelieving generation died off. Unfortunately for Joshua and Caleb, this meant forty years of waiting to enter the Promised Land. But the day finally comes and the Israelites invade the land that God had promised to them, and they begin to take it.

After a five to seven year military campaign, a good portion of the Promised Land is now under Israelite control, and the people begin divvying up the land and start to make Israel their permanent home. About this time, an 85 year old Caleb approaches Joshua and asks him for a chunk of land on which he can make his home. Before Israel had entered the land, Moses had promised Caleb that he would inherit the land that he had originally spied out - the land filled with giants. So Caleb has essentially come to collect - he wants the land that was promised to him by Moses, and Joshua blesses him and gives it to him.

But there's a catch: the land that is promised to Caleb is still filled with giants, even after the Israelite invasion. Not everybody has been cleared out, and there is still a significant giant population in Hebron, the land where Caleb was headed. But that doesn't shake this spit-fire of an old man. He says, "I am still as strong today as I was in the day that Moses sent me; my strength now is as my strength was then, for war and for going and coming. So now give me this hill country of which the LORD spoke on that day, for you heard on that day how the Anakim were there, with great fortified cities. It may be that the LORD will be with me, and I shall drive them out just as the LORD said."

Wow! Think of the faith of this guy. He's been waiting for 45 years for God to make good on his promise, and that day has finally come. 45 years of trusting God to be faithful! And there are still giants in the land that need to be taken care of. What does this 85 year old man say? "No problem. Bring 'em on. If God's with me, I'll take care of them. I'm still as fit today as ever I was. I can come and go, and I can still handle myself in a scrape."

This is a man of remarkable faith. He believed God to be faithful; he believed God to help him; he actively believed God even at the ripe old age of 85. What a cool story.

Good Grief

2010-12-07T23:00:00.002-06:00

I think the United States government may have reached a new low - or a new high, if we're talking about incompetence. Have you heard about this? It's a bill that mandates that TV commercials be at the same volume as the programs in which they appear, and no louder. The bill basically instructs the FCC to regulate the volume level of commercials. It's gone through the house and the senate and is apparently waiting on President Obama's signature. Apparently U.S. citizens aren't smart enough to turn down the volume when commercials come on, and they need the federal government to come running to their aid and save their ears from annoying car commercials. Who actually thought this was a good use of taxpayer dollars? I'm almost speechless. It's despicable.

Here's a clue for ya, government. When I see an ad I don't like, I turn the channel, or I turn the volume down, or I just don't give the company my business. Case in point:

This is perhaps the most annoying, ridiculous advertisement I have ever seen in my life. This ad virtually assures me that I will never buy a car from Luther Kia. The dancing Santa is ludicrous; the song makes me want to pull my hair out; and the guy screaming at me to buy a new Kia grates on my nerves. I would never give money to the company that produces these commercials. I find them offensive.

But you know what? I don't need the government to rescue me from "Santa's Brand New Ride." I've got a remote and a finger. That'll do the trick. No new laws necessary.

What If Abortion Were Illegal?

2010-12-05T00:54:00.005-06:00

One of my friends on Facebook posted this video (warning: there are some very brief images of aborted babies in this video):

The voice behind the camera in the video claims to be from the AtCenter Network, an online "news" agency. He's going around, asking pro-life protestors questions like, "What should the penalty be for a woman who had an illegal abortion? Should there be a punishment under the law against women who have illegal abortions?"

First of all, the LAST intention of this video is to gather "news." The video is set up to make people who are pro-life look stupid because they supposedly haven't thought about the ramifications of their stance. That's totally misleading, and I think it's purposely misleading. Why haven't abortion protestors thought this question through? Because it hasn't been relevant for the past 35 years. I have to admit that I haven't thought through this question before I saw this video, but it only took me about 1.5 seconds to come up with an answer (to that end, the pro-life people in the video do look a tad slow - how hard is it to come up with an answer?).

Before I give you my answer, it's important to make sure we're all working under the same understandings. I'm working under the assumption that, if abortion were illegal, it would be because the unborn "fetus" would be considered a human life, and the taking of said life would be seen as murder (hence the illegality of the action). If this were the reason for outlawing abortion, then anyone who took part in an abortion (mother, doctor, someone who drove the mother to the abortionist, etc.) would be viewed, legally, as an accessory to murder at the very least, if not charged for 1st degree murder. So then, the answer is, "yes." IF abortion were illegal, and IF abortion were viewed as murder, and IF a mother or doctor were convicted of having an abortion / committing murder, they obviously should be punished under the law. All murderers should be punished. What should the punishment be for murdering an unborn child, exactly? That would vary the same way that punishment for "regular" murder varies.

The guy behind the camera wants these pro-life demonstrators to say that women who have an abortion should be punished, and punished severely. His questions are framed in a context that will force the answer (that he wants) to be seen in a negative light. That way, he can trump up charges of insanity against the pro-life movement for wanting to punish innocent women who have already suffered the trauma of an abortion (but why would it be a trauma? Isn't it a simple medical procedure?) He wants them to look heartless and crazy. It's incredibly deceptive and fallacious. I wonder what pro-choice people would say if asked the same question? Do they have an automatic answer they would spit out? Of course not. Why? Because they likewise haven't considered the question for the past 35 years. Or ask the pro-choicers this: What should the punishment be for a woman who has a late term abortion (which is already illegal)? Come on, someone spit that answer out on the spot! Didn't think so.

Abortion comes down to one question: is the "blob of tissue" in the mother's womb a life? If the definitive answer is "no," than go ahead and do whatever you want to it. People have surgeries to remove tissue all the time. But if the answer is yes (not even "definitively yes," but even just "probably yes") then it should absolutely be illegal to do anything harmful to it, let alone kill it, and anyone who were to harm the unborn life in any way should face the full effects of the law.

Hamstring the Horses and Burn the Chariots

2010-12-01T23:49:00.003-06:00

In our men's Bible study tonight at church, we read Joshua 11 and 12. Basically, a whole bunch of Canaanite kings joined forces to go against Israel. In verse 4 of chapter 11 it says that the number of soldiers coming against Israel were as many as the sand on the seashore, "with very many horses and chariots." In verse 6 God tells Joshua that, when the battle is over, he should hamstring the horses and burn the chariots. In verse 9 that's exactly what Joshua does.

The whole book of Joshua is a testament to the greatness of God as he empowers Israel to dominate their enemies and take the land that is theirs. The author of Joshua goes to great lengths to show that it is God who has the power, and not the people, and that the only reason the Israelites are successful is because God is fighting for them.

It seems reasonable to think that Israel, as a nation and as a military force, did not have access to either horses or chariots. There is significant evidence that this was the case. The question that seems to arise then, is this: why did the Israelites hamstring the horses and burn the chariots of their enemies? Why not take the horses and chariots for themselves? There was still some land that needed to be conquered, and people that needed to be kicked out of the Promised Land. Why not take the horses and chariots to aid in those endeavors? Certainly Israel would have been that much more of a dominating force if they had these resources. Or if not for battle, why not at least take the horses to use for transportation or labor purposes? It just doesn't seem to make sense. Why destroy such useful tools?

I can think of at least two reasons for why God had Joshua and the Israelites hamstring the horses and burn the chariots.

1) The use of chariots was probably the pinnacle of military technology at the time. In telling the Israelites to essentially destroy the things that could help them, God was telling them that they didn't need excessive technology or weapons to achieve what they wanted to achieve. They only needed God. If the Israelites were to take and use the horses and chariots of their enemies, they may have ended up trusting in their superior equipment or technology rather than God. Israel had this problem earlier in the book of Joshua, and it didn't work out well for them.

2) God was showing the Israelites that he was bigger and better than the best that man had to offer. The Egyptians were known and feared for their use of horses and chariots in military campaigns. In the ancient world, the army with the horses and chariots had a significant upper hand in any battle. Horses of the day were trained not to stop for anything. They were essentially trained to run over any and everything in their way. Thus a single horse-drawn chariot could be an extremely powerful weapon. The only way to stop it would be to kill the horse or the driver. But even with all the advantages that horses and chariots offered an army, those advantages were nothing compared to having God on your side and fighting for you. I think this was something the Israelites needed to see: God is infinitely better than anything man could offer. And when you have God on your side, things like horses and chariots seem to pale in comparison.

I think I need to hamstring some horses and burn some chariots in my life.

Innovation for the Mission Field

2010-12-01T10:26:00.000-06:00

Remember Steve Saint? He's the son of murdered missionary pilot, Nate Saint. Steve took up where his dad left off, learned to fly, and got involved in missions. Now he's an experienced flier and entrepreneur who is innovating for the benefit of the mission field. Check this out. This is awesome.

Funny, Cute, and Gross Stuff That Happened Today

2010-11-30T22:41:00.000-06:00

FUNNY: Every Tuesday my mom takes my kids to the local community center swimming pool, along with my sister and her youngest. They usually go swimming for a couple hours, and then head on over to McDonald's for lunch and some time in the playland. Today my kid was at the playland and told my mom he needed to go to the bathroom, which he went and did. A while later, after he had gone potty, my mom went into the bathroom and found a pair of underwear on the floor (this is normal behavior of Jamie - he doesn't really like to wear underwear). She confronted him and asked him if he took his underwear off and left it in the bathroom. He confessed that he did. When my mom insisted that he needed to wear his underwear, he said (in a very LOUD voice - loud enough for all in McDonald's playland to hear), "But I want to go commando!" "Going commando" is the state of being of not wearing any underwear, and it's a term we use frequently at our house. He's picked up on it, and uses the term quite a bit - even in public places, apparently. I wasn't there, but I was told the whole McDonald's playland was laughing.

CUTE: Each night Jamie sings some songs before he goes to bed. Every night he insists that we sing "The B-I-B-L-E" and we always do. I guess Han has picked up on this song too, because tonight she was singing the song like this: "Da B-I-B-I-B...Bibo!" Yeah, her spelling and pronunciation might need a little work, but it was pretty stinkin' cute.

GROSS: For some reason, my kids have a habit of coughing so hard that they make themselves throw up. I was in the basement tonight, taking a shower, when all of a sudden I heard a lot of crying coming from Jamie's room upstairs, and the I could hear the water pipes moving water to somewhere in the house. A closer listen led me to realize that the bathtub was filling up for some reason. This was at about 8:45 PM, which is 45 minutes after the kids' bedtimes, so a bath at this time of night was not usual. I came upstairs and the smell of hot barf met my nose as I walked down the hall. Jamie was in the tub, washing the puke off himself. His Turkey a la King was all over his bed, blankets (even his "blue blankey!"), and even a little bit on his stuffed Thomas. After he washed up I sat with him for a while, until we could find a replacement blankey while his regular one went into the wash.

All in all, having kids is awesome - even when they puke while you're in the shower.

Really Diggin' This

2010-11-29T23:20:00.000-06:00

A few months ago we purchased this Bible. It's basically a children's Bible, except it's a significant step up. Instead of having the stories written in childish language, it's stories from the Bible using the actual words of scripture, but pared down into child-size bites. In other words, the whole story of Joseph (which is long and covers several chapters in the book of Genesis) is trimmed down to several smaller pericopes that tell chunks of the story. For example, you have the story of Joseph's dreams in one pericope, the story of him being sold into slavery in another, the story of him in prison in another, interpreting dreams in another, preparing for the famine in another, his brothers returning in another, and so on and so forth. This way, the kids' attention can be kept while still using the actual words of scripture (and not someone's interpretation of how a child might understand the words of scripture - big difference!).

But aren't there parts of the text that kids won't understand? Especially in the ESV translation? Yes, the ESV is an "essentially literal" translation, and there are a lot of big words, and some difficult phrasing, but that's not really the point. Truth be told, I'm not even reading my kids Bible stories for their understanding. It's more just to get the word of God into them in some way - and to get it into them in a literal way, and not a cutesy, childish way that might make them think that the Bible is nothing but fairy tales and nice stories, which is the way Bible stories are usually presented in children's Bible story books.

Another cool thing about this Bible is the great illustrations. Every single story has an illustration. There are more than 200 illustrations in this Bible. They aren't cutesy or childish either, but really depict what is going on in the story. The kids like them, and they're good to use to review the story with the kids. I have Jamie point out the main characters, and tell me what they did in the story.

Either Betsy or I read at least one story to Jamie each night. It's the way we cap off his bedtime routing: we read some regular books, sing songs, and read a Bible story. Tonight Jamie and I completed the story of Esther, and as I turned the page to put the bookmark in the next story, I realized that we had "completed" the Old Testament. Esther was the last story in the Old Testament in this Bible (What? No major or minor prophets!? Just kidding). That's pretty cool. We've read through a large portion of the Old Testament - word for word - with our three year old.

There's a Doings A-Transpiring

2010-11-29T17:45:00.001-06:00

There was a doings a-transpiring at the church today. Last week a cement cutter was at the church and cut off the stairs that were attached to the western most side of the building, on the end of the education wing of the church. I say were attached, because they no longer are. A huge backhoe came today, gave the steps a few taps, and out they came. It was incredibly fun to watch. When the lower steps came out, the backhoe went to scoop them up in its bucket. As I watched it, I thought there would be no way those steps would be able to fit in the bucket. I was wrong. The backhoe scooped 'em up and tossed 'em aside like a pebble. Pretty cool stuff to watch, and exciting to see things starting to happen with Riverview's building project.

You and the Chips

2010-11-27T21:46:00.000-06:00

Something funny happened last night. We had hot dogs and chips for supper, and Han was walking around the living room with a hand full of chips. When she got tired of holding them, she looked at us, and dropped them straight onto the floor. Betsy told her to pick up the chips, but Han just looked away and went on to doing something else, which Betsy did not like. She went and got Han and made her pick up the chips, which Han didn't like. She began to cry and protested about picking up the chips.

While all this was happening, I was sitting in the chair, watching it all take place. At some point in time, Ferg grabbed the camera and started taking pictures of the events as they unfolded. At one point, he got in really close to Han and Betsy and snapped a picture, and then proudly proclaimed, "Mom, I took a picture of you and the chips!"

I guess you had to be there.

Pleasantly Surprised

2010-11-26T22:08:00.002-06:00

For one of my seminary classes this quarter I've had to read The Return of the Prodigal Son by Henri Nouwen. It's essentially an interpretation of the parable of the prodigal son through the lens of a painting of the same name by Rembrandt. The class the for which the reading was assigned is certainly not one of my favorites. In fact, I usually find myself trudging through the four hours of class time each week, watching the clock, until I can leave. The content of the course is a bit to touchy-feely for me. It's got a "connect with your feelings" type of feel, and that's just not my thing, nor do I think it's really a biblical way to go about things, such as spiritual growth.

Before I read the book, I wasn't really looking forward to reading it. I had heard some things about Henri Nouwen that didn't really excite me, and I've read some things by people I have significant theological disagreements with who cite Nouwen in their work. Needless to say, I thought the book would be a bummer at best, and make me angry at worst. I was wrong on both accounts. It was a really good read.

Nouwen presents a lot of biographical information about the artist, Rembrandt, and weaves it into the painting, and also into the parable. Fascinating stuff, really. He makes a lot of great connections that I had never thought of before, probably because I was too familiar with the parable to be able to see them myself (specifically, I thought the connection of the older son to a Pharisaic, legalistic worldview was very interesting, and probably spot on - I'd never heard this interpretation before). If you think you know the parable of the prodigal son, let me assure you, there is always more to learn and new insights to gain. And this book is a great way to do just that.

A few warnings for you, though, should you choose to look at the book: 1) it's always a dangerous thing to try to interpret scripture through something else, such as a particular worldview, political bent, painting, music, etc. It's one step further away from the unadulterated truth. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it should be done extremely carefully, and rarely. Scripture can always speak for itself. It doesn't need anything else to communicate. Nouwen does a good job with this in his book, though, and he notes a few places where the painting is inadequate. 2) There is a section in the book about God as mother that I wasn't too fond of. Thankfully, this section is short and doesn't really influence the rest of Nouwen's work. 3) Much like my class, I think there are times when Nouwen brings too much emotion into the picture, and not enough scripture or theology.

The Return of the Prodigal Son by Henri Nouwen. Check it out.

3 Year Old Guilt

2010-11-25T21:54:00.002-06:00

Tonight on the way home from my parents' house after Thanksgiving dinner, I had an interesting exchange with my three year old son. Two weeks ago, after the first snow of the season, our whole family went outside to play in the snow as it fell. It was great snowman-making snow, so Jamie and I immediately went to making a snowman. It was the first one that I've made in probably 20 years, and it was Jamie's first snowman ever, so I was really enjoying myself. And I really played it up with the boy, talking about how cool this snowman was going to be, and how fun it was to pack all the snow together. By the time we had the three tiers of the snowman put together, my wife and daughter joined us in the front yard. I had just finished strategically placing the rocks that formed the snowman's face, and encouraged my daughter to take a look. As I had my back turned, Jamie jumped, kicked, and knocked the snowman down, landing on top of the rubble. Needless to say, I was a bit shocked. After all the work we had put in together building that snowman, I was absolutely not expecting him to just tear it all down in two seconds. I told him that I was kind of sad that he would do that, especially after all the hard work we put in on it together. He didn't seem to care, so I said I didn't really want to play any more. He was cold too, so we went inside, but I explained to him that he shouldn't just go knocking down things that other people have worked on.

Cut to tonight: on the way home from my parents', Jamie and I were driving and listening to music. During a quiet part, he said from the back seat, "Dad?" "Yeah, buddy," I said. He got quiet and said, "I'm sorry I knocked down your snowman." I had to think for a minute, and then remembered what happened a couple weeks ago. "That's OK, buddy. I forgive you." "Thanks," he said. He kept apologizing all the way home, and I finally told him that once someone is forgiven, they don't need to apologize anymore, which he seemed to understand. He finally suggested that he and I build another snowman tomorrow, and I agreed. Then he said, "And then maybe we can knock it down!" I agreed.

It's interesting that, even in a three year old, the conscience works and works. Even young children know when they've done something wrong, and they know that it's right to apologize. His conscience has been eating away at him for the past two weeks, and for whatever reason, tonight it led him to do something about it.

I can't wait to build another snowman!

Proclamation of Thanksgiving

2010-11-25T13:08:00.001-06:00

By the President of the United States of America.

A Proclamation.

The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle or the ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consiousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom. No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington, this Third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the Unites States the Eighty-eighth.

By the President: Abraham Lincoln

William H. Seward,
Secretary of State

Starting Over...Again

2010-11-24T23:01:00.000-06:00

This blog got a facelift again. I've been wanting my sister to use her fancy-pants-graphic-designer skills to redesign my blog, but it seems like I never get around to asking her, so I just made my own template. Could be better. Oh well.

Over the past several months there have been several things that I've either thought about, or stuff that has happened either to me or to people in my life, and I've thought to myself, "Hmm. I should blog about that." But guess what - I never do. This blogging thing seems to be a discipline for me, and it's one that I really suck at. I do think it's valuable. It's a good avenue to get other people thinking about stuff that I'm thinking about, a way of creating conversation with people, a way to share about stuff to pray for, and I think blogging is just a good practice overall.

Hopefully I can stick with it on at least a semi-regular basis. If you read my "short, inadequate description of who I am," you'll find out that I'm in seminary full time, and work full time, and have young kids. It leaves me with barely enough time to breathe, let alone blog. But I'll give it another shot.

A lot of what I want to post on here is links to other great stuff that I find during my daily bustling about on the internet. I highly recommend the blogs listed to the right. There's some really good stuff there.

A Difficult Phone Call

2010-07-02T16:44:00.003-05:00

Sitting in the church office this afternoon, I received a phone call that is somewhat typical. It was a man who was looking for spiritual counsel. Usually when someone calls looking for counsel, there's a catch: they're also looking for money or to have some kind of need fulfilled. That's fine, but not really something our church is equipped to handle, so I usually forward them on to Neighbors.

But the guy who called today wasn't looking for anything but counsel. He said that he was a Christian, and even a Baptist. He told me that he was ready to jump off a bridge, although not literally. He said that he had been trying and trying to do right, and read the scriptures, and do what he "was supposed to do," but it seemed like God wasn't doing anything for him. He said he didn't know what he could do, and that he didn't know where his kids were going to sleep tonight (they apparently were losing their housing).

There was quite a bit more that he said, although I'm not sure I ever got the whole story of what his problem was. What was certain was that he was unsure of his future, and he didn't know where to go from here. I told him that all I could do was ask him this question: is God sovereign? Does God have a will and a plan that he is working out for the good of those who love him? He answered, "Yes, of course." Then I said, "Then trust that plan. Trust that God is good. Trust that God loves you and cares for you, and that he will work things out in his own time and in his own way and in his own good pleasure."

I told him this wasn't necessarily an easy answer, but it was the only one that I had. He was obviously unsatisfied with my answer, because he just said, "Uh, thanks." And hung up.

First of all, calls like these are hard to deal with, because I had no idea who this guy was, what his background was like, or even what is specific problem was. But that being said, I think I can take two things away from this phone call: 1) there is a lot of bad teaching out there that says that if you just believe enough or do all the right things, that God will protect you, give you money, and success. This guy didn't have any of those, so he assumed that either he wasn't doing what he "needed" to do, or that God was being unfair. He was living in a quid pro quo relationship with God that said that God owed him something for the good things he had done. When this is your outlook, an answer like the one I gave him will definitely go down bitter.

2) Secondly, the answers to issues like the ones he presented are never easy to deal with, but they should never leave us hopeless. This man was utterly hopeless. He was at the end of his rope. The thought of an all-powerful, sovereign God on his side did nothing to bolster his confidence or give him hope, which is sad. Now, having an all-powerful sovereign God on your side doesn't make life easy, or difficult situations easy, but it does provide a large measure of hope. Hope that no matter what happens, I have a portion with the Almighty, and I have forgiveness of sins through his Son.

It is not necessarily easy to trust that God loves me and cares for me when my walls are crashing down, but it's what we must do. Because if we don't have that, then we don't have anything - especially when the walls are crashing down all around us.

I hope that guy can learn to trust God, because God's the only thing he's got. God's the only thing any of us have got. And if you can't trust him, you'll always be at the end of a rope.