Out of Vogue

On the Past and Uncertain Future: Reflections on Ecclesiastes

2010-06-03T10:34:00.000-07:00

Even after 30 years of reading and studying the Bible, I am still amazed at the insight God provides through His written word. I probably have read Ecclesiastes over 10 times. Each time something "new" pops out. Last night, I was captivated halfway through chapter 7. Both verses 10 and 14 are still swirling through my head. These verses provide human instruction for living "under the sun" - the time prior to God bring down His kingdom, "the new heavens and the new earth."

Verse 7 warns us not to seek the "former days." Solomon insists that asking the question, "Why were the former days better than these?" does not stem "from wisdom." If we look to the past and long for the good ol' days, our minds are distracted from the present. We deny God's providential care NOW, seeking to escape our present circumstances in which He has placed us. It is a subtle complaint against the Divine Majesty - both a questioning and fist-shaking at His present goodness.

But we should not think a certain, self-created, future utopia is the solution to man's escapist thinking. In verse 14, Solomon tells us that God brings both prosperity and adversity "so that man may not find out anything that will be after him." The implication of Solomon's words are astounding: God does not want us to find certainty from our circumstances while we live 'under the sun'. Interpreting our present circumstances as an indication of a blissful future both assumes and presumes upon God's future actions. Solomon, therefore, instructs us to be "joyful" during prosperity and to "consider" God's Sovereignty during adversity - He brings both upon us. Of course, God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. So why should we joyfully praise Him only when times are good? His character is the same when times are tough.

For Christians, Solomon's affirmation to focus on the present has a unique meaning. For what is true about the present? Christ is presently reigning "above the sun." For a short time, He lived "under the sun," only to complete His mission and bring together the past, present, and future. He sits at the "right hand of God, the Father Almighty." He is now "crowned with glory and honor." And, as Paul tells us, "our [present] life is hid with Christ, in God." It is not longer we who live, but "Christ lives through" us.

How, then, do we fulfill Solomon's call to true wisdom? By focusing on Christ, "who is our life." May we banish all human utopias, both past and future. Instead, as we live here under the sun, let us realize what our Savior has done, is doing, and will do. He Himself - who presently lives - is making all things new.

"She" , inspired by Franz Kafka's, "A Little Woman"

2010-03-09T22:23:00.000-08:00

I don’t know why she hates me so much. Perhaps hate is a strong word, but that is how I feel – at least at this moment. We are sitting across from each other, her eyes attentively fixed on me as she attempts to make eye contact. I, however, cannot look in those eyes, nor can I bear the smug grin and tilted head. It is the gesture of condescension, like a mother scowling over the stupidity of her adolescent son who should have known better. Protesting that I am a “man in my thirties” won’t help. I’ve tried that. Any protest simply ends in more severe body language – a shaking of the head and that long, lingering sigh that screams, “You’re an idiot! Grow up!”

Instead of looking at her, I am studying my shirt buttons as my fingers fiddle with them. She knows I don’t want to talk to her. She also knows I won’t talk to her. That doesn’t seem to bother her, though, because we’ve done this before. Every time she puts on that stern, unrelenting face I clamor up. I’ve never timed myself, but I would guess it takes me a half an hour to finally say something. That’s another one her spiteful tactics – the calm, patient waiting game. I bet she can sit for hours at a time, staring at me if she had to. She’s a control freak and a game player. And the worse part of it is she knows her body language, eyes, and perseverance are daggers piercing my conscience. She sees right through my nonchalant façade. She knows I don’t give a damn about these damn buttons on my shirt.

So, predictably, I change tactics. I move from button-fiddling to nail-biting. I should call it nail-studying. I spend a few seconds looking over each nail, deciding which one to bite first. When I make a semi-closed fist and hold my hand a foot-and-a-half in front of my face, I can see her reaction from the corner of my eyes. She also knows I don’t give a damn about my nails. Every time she wants to sit and talk with me I play this game – the game of not talking and waiting to see who cracks first. What does she want to talk about today? What did I do this time? I haven’t cheated on her. I’ve paid the bills. I haven’t yelled at her, beat her, or even gossiped behind her back. We’ve been together for years and, for the most part, I am content with her. It’s only times like these – times in which she holds her nose in the air and stiffens her upper lip – that make me self-conscious. What does she want? Why is she so cold and unfeeling right now? I am sick of her lectures. I am tired of her forcing her views upon me. Why can’t she accept me for who I am?

As I finish chewing my last nail, I muster up the courage to look her in the eyes. “Are you finally going to talk?” she gently asks with a warm, welcoming smile. I nod my head. She softly continues, “Where did we leave off?”

“We were discussing my avoidance issues, my problem with projection, and my self-absorption, Doctor.”

Revolutionary Changes

2009-08-01T01:08:00.000-07:00

1) Amend the 1st Amendment. Islam should be outlawed, not because we are a "Christian" nation, but because Muslims are involved in most of the conflicts around the globe. Extremists always find footholds in this religion. We should prevent, as much as possible, the possibility of a radical takeover in our country. Let them emigrate to Canada to practice their faith.

2) Amend the 5th Amendment. No citizen should have the right to hide their criminal activity. Self incrimination is the best kind.

3) Amend the 6th Amendment. "Speedy" should be accompanied with specific time frames.

4) Amend the 14th Amendment. Only those children born of legal citizens should be considered citizens of the United States.

5) Amend the 16th Amendment. The power to "lay and collect taxes on income" should be enumerated. A flat tax should be imposed on ALL wage earners, not just half the country.

6) Amend the 26th Amendment. No one should be allowed to vote who is under 30 years of age. Eighteen is an arbitrary number, so making another arbitrary number is just as good. Those who are 30 or older have experienced life and, typically, have a better understanding of what is at stake than an 18 year old. There will always be exceptions.

Congress & The President

7) Congressmen and women should be compensated as follows: Representatives should be paid the median price of the district they represent, not to exceed $50,000.00 per year. Senators should be paid the median price plus 5% of the district they represent, not to exceed $60,000.00 per year.

8) Senators and Representatives should take care of their own retirement plans, health care, travel, dining, etc. Their life should not be funded by the taxpayers.

9) The President should be compensated as follows: The median price income of the entire nation. If the median price increases or decreases, his salary will likewise change. He, too, should be responsible for his own health care, travel, retirement, dining, etc.

10) Legislative interns should be outlawed. Senators and Representatives who cannot understand a bill, or do not have the time to read the bill, have no business hiring interns to do the reading and dissection for them.

Crime & Punishment

11) The definition of capital crimes should be expanded to include rape, pedophilia, attempted murder, severe battery, and conspiracy to commit murder.

12) The punishment for all capital crimes is death - no exceptions. Attorneys should not have the right to negotiate lesser sentencing or the option to prosecute any other punishment.

13) Victims of capital crimes, or their immediate family, should have the right to choose the method of execution.

14) All executions should be televised.

This is merely a beginning.

Misguided Pity

2009-07-11T13:03:00.000-07:00

There are two recurring phrases in Deuteronomy that caught my attention the other night. As I continue to reflect on them and consider the consequences of these commands from God, I am beginning to believe that much of the American church misdirects its compassion.

The first phrase is "purge the evil from your midst." It first caught my eye in Deuteronomy 21:21. Through Moses, our Lord commanded the Israelites to perform capital punishment by "ston[ing] him to death with stones." The him refers to a rebellious and unrepentant son, who is "a glutton and a drunkard." Strictly following this command, said God, would cause the people to "hear" and "fear." This phrase occurs several more times.

A few chapters later, 25:11, God tells His people that their "eye shall have no pity." He is referring to a wife who comes to the defense of her husband. If her husband is fighting with another man, and she tries to "rescue" her spouse by seizing the "private parts" of the other man, then her hand was to be cut off. The idea of showing "no pity" for lawbreakers occurs several times.

My point in bringing this up is not to re-institute Old Testament punishment in America. It was never here to begin with. However, this pitiless hatred of sin causes me to ask two significant questions with follow-up questions. First, how would we respond if our country instituted identical punishments for identical crimes? Would we cry out "unmerciful?" Would we accuse the government of being "unChristian?" Would we bemoan the death of "sensitivity?" Would Christians unite for some form of "the natural rights of man," which the new punishments violate?

Secondly, is probing the "psychological" and "sociological" reasons for crime, as well as pushing "rehabilitation," missing God's point? What is the reason God gives for expelling brothers and sisters from the community? Does He tell His people to consider the "background" or "family upbringing" of the offender? Education level? Class? Ethnicity? Intelligence?

Why I Believe 9/11 Conspiracies

2009-04-25T22:03:00.000-07:00

At the risk of being labeled a "nut" or "whack job," I write this next piece. Let me set the record straight before I begin. First, I do not believe every 9/11 conspiracy out there. However, I do believe that something happened that day which our government is not telling us via the "official story." Second, I am neither an anarchist nor an anti-war advocate. I think good laws are necessary for a healthy nation, and I do not think we use our military enough. And, third, I have never used drugs, unless you consider alcohol and nicotine drugs. With these preliminaries out of the way, here is why I believe that something else happened on 9/11:

1) During a short press conference, Donald Rumsfel said that a plane was "shot down" over Pennsylvania by the terrorists. This video can be seen on YouTube - I am certain many of you have seen it. What is startling about the short clip, is the confidence with which Rumsfeld spoke. He was reading prepared remarks. Need I remind everyone that Rumsfeld is a polished politician. He has served our country since the Nixon Era. He does not make mistakes when addressing the media, especially with an issue as significant as 9/11. In fact, those who have watched Rumsfeld over the years all say the same thing: he speaks his mind and is a straight-shooter. When you watch the video, notice the people in the background react when Rumsfeld uses the words "shot down."

2) I do not buy the argument that people's memories are more flawed during stressful or chaotic times. Am I the only one who disagrees with this point? I have found just the opposite to be true. Our senses are heightened in times of stress and chaos. We are more aware of what is going on around us. It is common sense, despite what any psychologist says. This is important because people from all walks of life said they heard "bombs" or "secondary explosions" around the WTC buildings as the fire enveloped the upper floors.

3) There is no way a 747 hit the Pentagon, at least the way the official report claims. More damage, and a different caliber of damage would have occurred.

4) Terrorists responsible for the hijackings have been confirmed alive. Even the number is exaggerated - all I need is one of them to be alive for something rotten to be in Denmark.

5) The crash site in Pennsylvania did not look like any plane crash I have seen before.

6) The AP story about United 93 landing in Cleveland was printed then removed within an hour. This is suspicious.

7) The military training exercises that morning were virtually identical with real life. Yet, the claim is that the government had "no idea" that planes would ever be hijacked and flown into buildings.

I could probably think of other reasons that lead to me to believe that something else went on that morning that we have not been told. These reasons, however, are sufficient for me to distrust the offical story. "Our age is one of advertisement" - that was spoken in 1847 by Soren Kiekergaard. How prophetic and applicable are those words today!

For those who unwaveringly accept the government's version of the facts, I leave you with two facts and one conjecture. First the facts: The event that caused US involvement in both the Spanish American War and Vietnam have been proven false. The destruction of the Maine and the Gulf of Tonkin incident were fabricated to engage our enemies. And now the speculation. Some historians think FDR knew about the bombing of Pearl Harbor before it happened. Nothing proven...but it makes you wonder.

Is it really so difficult to believe that nations need war to survive? Our economy is intertwined and dependent on military and defense spending. President Eisenhower warned us of the "military industrial complex" before he left office. We should have listened.

But What If God Doesn't Love Me?

2009-04-18T15:28:00.000-07:00

One of the major themes in the Old Testament is God's condemnation of idolatry. He wanted His people to think about and serve Him in a particular way. In broad terms, idolatry was any deviation from God's prescribed form of worship. In specific terms, idolatry encompasses the first three of the 10 commandments. First, God was to be the only God. Second, the people of God were not to make an image of God in any form. It is important to grasp the second commandment because, oftentimes, we think of false gods as idols. However, the commandment is not to make an image of the Only God as well as any god. This was the problem with the golden calf - Aaron told them that the God that delivered them from Egypt was the golden statue. Their intentions may have been good, but their hearts and minds were not devoted to the One God who cannot be represented through gold, wood, or stone. And, third, God's people were not invoke His name when swearing oaths. The Name of God is holy, and, therefore, should only be used for Holy purposes.

Many professing Christians may not bow down to carved images. However, idolatry is rampant in the American church. Take for instance an experience I had this morning. As I was waiting at a red light to make left turn, members of a local church - Vantage Point - passed out cold water to all the drivers in the turning lane. It was a great gesture. It was kind. The ice-cold water actually refreshed me. In addition to the bottle of water, the church members passed out a "business" card with the church's logo and the following message: "This is our simple way of saying that...GOD LOVES YOU." Undoubtedly the inspiration for such a kind and thoughtful gesture came from Christ's own words in Matthew 25:35-40. Christ tells His disciples that, at the Final Judgment, the sheep will be blessed because they gave drink, food, and comfort to Him.

Of course, many Christians and preachers stop at the good works we should do to fellow human beings. But is that what Christ says? If we continue in the passage, Jesus is very specific: "Truly, I say to you, as you did it to ONE OF THE LEAST OF THESE MY BROTHERS, you did it to me." Notice the distinction Jesus makes between those who are His family and those who are not. Our first priority, says Jesus, is to take care of the Church. Why? Because in taking care of the Church, we are taking care of Him. He is intimately connected to His church. This is why Christ told Saul of Tarsus that he was persecuting Him as disciples were being slaughtered.

But Americans today do not like the idea that God only loves some people. They cannot stomach a God who chooses to love some and hate others. Even the word "hate" is seen as an evil word, especially when applied to God. But, as Paul said, "let God be true and every man a liar." God, Himself, said He hated Esau. Jesus was anything but loving to the Pharisees and teachers of the law. In fact, He pronounced curses on them. And, we should never forget, that the cross is both a sign of love and hate. Love for those whose sins were forgiven; hate for those who were kept in their sins.

So when I receive a card that says, "God Loves You," I, of course, glory in God's grace towards me. However, we should not represent God as a Universal Lover of Mankind. He never reveals Himself this way. To believe, teach, act, or speak, otherwise is a form of idolatry. In a world that desperately needs the Way, the Truth, and the Life, we should be all the more earnest to present Him truthfully. The fact is, the Father only loves those who are connected to the Son. Unless, of course, you believe that Christ denying those who deny Him as a "loving" act. We need to let God be God - let Him make the distinctions, not us.

The Right's Historical Revisionism

2009-04-09T08:06:00.000-07:00

Last week President Obama said that America was not a Christian nation, setting a frenzy over the airwaves of conservative talk radio. Both hosts and callers were dumbfounded and irate at the President's statement. I, for one, was not. Although I am politically conservative, I do not suffer from the historical revisionism of the American right. American conservatives need a good dose of history, philosophy, and Scripture, to remove the shackles of illusion.

I know we were taught in public schools that Europeans emigrated to the New World for the three "G's", gold, glory, and God. Usually they are put in that order, as well. However, a cursory reading of both "The Mayflower Compact" and "A Model of Christian Charity" reveals quite a different story. God was the primary motivation. One need only read the founding charters of the Ivy League schools to support this fact. Spreading Christianity throughout the New world - converting the nations to the Faith - was the rudimentary objective. Even pre-college school children received thorough instruction in the teachings of Scripture through The New England Primer. It was the best-selling text in the colonies, apart from the Bible. Writings of Puritans and Pilgrims abound with Christian teachings and passages from Scripture. Colonial literature drips so heavily with religion, God, and the Bible, perhaps it is only natural that many believe our nation used to be a Christian nation.

But when did the U.S. become a nation? When the Pilgrims landed in 1620? When Winthrop proclaimed that we should be a "city on a hill" in 1630? When Jonathan Edwards attested to the "surprising work of God" in the 1700s? Much time and history transpired between 1620 and 1776. Part of the problem with many conservatives is that they confuse 1776 with 1620, as if our nation was founded upon century-old ideas and sentiments that never changed. The Religious Right does not account for the intellectual hostility towards a Christian worldview that occured with the Enlightenment. The first document of our founding, "The Declaration of Independence," is indebted to the ideals of the Englightenment, not to Christianity.

Consider. When does the Bible give the Christian the right to rebel against authority? Where in the Bible are we told that we have the right to "liberty and the pursuit of happiness?" Would God be pleased with the idea of just calling Him "Nature's God?" Doesn't the Father want the Son to be glorified? Didn't the Son "sit down at the right hand of the Father?" Where is the mention, in our most important founding document, of Jesus being the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords? Does God ever tell us that "all men are created equal?" Compare the opening of Winthrop's, "A Model of Christian Charity," in which he argues for God making some poor, some rich, some base, some virtuous, for His own glory, to the idea of certain "unalienable rights?"

If we consider the Bill of Rights, the picture gets more grim. Would God be pleased with a law that guarantees liars the right to free expression? Does He permit gossip of any man? Is it a Christian idea to allow for diversity of worship in serving a supreme being? I thought the Son was "the Way, the Truth, and the Life?" Think about the 5th Amendment. Does it honor God to allow citizens to prevent themselves from prosecution? Does God ever give His creatures the right to deny their guilt? And, perhaps most telling, what does Scripture tell us is the source of true unity? Does "a more perfect union" come by man-made contracts and laws?

Many American Christians and conservatives need to wake up. This nation was never intended to be a Christian nation. Enlightenment ideals of equality and individual liberty led to the founding of the United States. Certainly there were many Christians in early America. But that is not constitute a God-honoring, or Christian, nation. The fact is, the Enlightenment championed human Reason above Divine Revelation. Not that every founding father or every leader was a Deist or Skeptic. But the most influential ones - Paine, Franklin, Jefferson, Washington - all questioned Revelation. They saw religion as a social good, not as "Truth." They stripped Christianity of its theology, and tried to keep the ethics. This can't be done because morality is connected with the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, who reveal it to mankind. For the Founding Fathers, acheiving political unity was more important than theological precision.

Do you still think America was a Christian nation? I encourage you to read Jefferson and Franklin on religion. Compare their views Jonathan Edwards, Cotton Mather, and John Winthrop. At least by reading, you will be able to discern the enormous difference in thought, tone, and motivation, among the Puritan writers and the Founding Fathers.

Towards Revolution

2009-02-23T19:10:00.000-08:00

For those who just expect me to write on religion and theology, I apologize. Well...actually I don't. History and politics interest me, although not as much as religion. So, if politics completely bore you, then I suggest you skip this post.

A growing sentiment seems to be filling the air of late. As I speak with my neighbors, listen to talk radio, and discuss the state of America, I think we are headed for another revolution. Of course, I welcome it. I think we have needed a revolution for many years. I do not have a love affair with violence. However, I am beginning to think that the only way to get things done is through violence.
Let me put it more plainly...VIOLENCE IS UNDERESTIMATED.

Here in California, leftist legislators are pushing to overturn the necessity of 2/3 majority. This would mean that laws could be enacted if only 51% of the congressmen vote for it. I heard an assemblywoman say, "It's just too difficult to get things done" by the current law. Funny...I wonder when she last read the Federalist Papers. The whole point of requiring a 2/3 majority was to make it difficult! Hamiliton's insight into man's nature and political corruption led him to create a system that the majority could not tyrannize the minority, and vice versa. It appears we come to a point when our politician are ready to finally destroy the Constitution.

But our country has bigger problems than that. We are giving billions of dollars to foreign countries, in the name of compassion. Government is spending our money to cure AIDS is Africa. Millions of dollars are sent to foreign countries who support abortions. We have an undying and irrational devotion to Israel. We allow terrorism and Islam to hold the world captive, all the while Christians are being murdered in Africa, China, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East.

Here at home, we continue to protect illegal aliens who also are taking our tax dollars. And, don't get me started on the hand-slapping that occurs with criminals in this country. Our legal system is a joke! We automatically give capital offenders an appeal. We are so concerned about appearing "nice" and "compassionate" that we have lost our sense of justice. When are we going to wake up!

Part of me wants Obama's plans to pass in force. I believe it will bring this country the purging and reckoning it has needed for many decades. America has a history of revolt. We understand what is just and unjust. We know when our rulers are not representing us. I am afraid, though, that we have lost our willingness to take back the country. I am afraid that too many people have been duped by materialism and the media. Too many rely on the goverment, and will refuse to "bite the hand that feeds them."

When are we going to wake up! When are we going to call a spade a spade? When are we going to oust our legislators and start over? When are going to realize that political elites are out of touch with us? When are going to take the law into our own hands?

The reckoning is coming. Thomas Paine is alive and well. But do we have the courage to "begin the world over again?"

Amadeus - A Movie Everyone Should See

2009-02-01T18:00:00.000-08:00

Not only is Milos Forman's Amadeus my favorite movie, but I think it is a must see for everyone. I first saw the movie when I was ten, and I have never forgotten it. It sparked a love for classical music that has remained with me to this day. As I have aged, the movie has become more meaningful to me. It is not just a great piece of art, filled with incredible music and outstanding performances. What makes Amadeus great is the plot behind the plot - the spiritual struggle between Salieri and God.

When Salieri recollects his memories of Mozart to the priest, he admits that Mozart was his "idol." Of course, not wanting to indict himself before a man of the cloth, he quickly adds that he was really jealous of Mozart's "father, who had taught him everything." We soon come to realize, though, that Salieri's obsession and idolization is in the fact the boy "prodigy."

When Salieri finally meets Mozart, he is shocked with the "giggling, dirty-minded creature, crawling on the floor." His disgust at Mozart's behavior compels him to question God: "But why! Why would God choose..." It is Salieri's struggle with God's Providence and giftings that create the real drama in Amadeus. The idolization, contempt, and jealousy for Mozart are merely incidental. After all, would not God be a better God if He gifted an upright, chaste composer, like Salieri?

Salieri's downward spiral gets worse. After Mozart memorizes Salieri's original piece on "one hearing only," he improves it, drawing attention and accalades from those within and without the chamber. This causes Salieri to give his hanging crucifix a stern, quasi-evil eye. "Gracias, Senor," is all he could say in rebellion and jealousy. He then asks the question, "What was God up to?" when he discovers Mozart fornicated with his "darling girl." It is almost as if God is using Mozart's evil to chasten Salieri, revealing his inner heart, which questions God justice. Forman wrote this movie with brilliance.

The final separation between Salieri and God comes when Constanza, Mozart's wife, secretly brings her husband's work to be viewed. Salieri is shocked that Mozart "doesn't make copies" of his compositions. Why is it so shocking? "They showed no corrections of any kind! Page after page of it! As if just taking dictation!" Studying Mozart's original works enraptures Salieri, causing him to drop them on the floor. Although he agrees the works are "miraculous," Salieri refuses to help Constanza. He leaves her on the floor without help.

"From now on we are enemies. You and I. Because you choose..." These are the next words we hear from Salieri's mouth. They are a sign that he is fed with God's bestowing musical gifts to Mozart, leaving him only the "ability to recognize the incarnation." He removes the crucifix from the wall and burns it in the fire, promising to "ruin Your incarnation."

Pride, self-righteousness, jealousy, God's Providence and giftings, and the eternal struggle between God's Mind and man's mind combine to make Amadeus much more than an Academy Award winning picture. It is a testament to great art, and a story that continues to both inspire and bewilder the true humanist.

Thoughts on Salvation

2008-12-18T20:16:00.000-08:00

If the non-believer's starting point is corruption of will, emotions, mind, body, etc., then the birth of the new man is truly miraculous. It is sad how trite much of the church has become with salvation. We take it for granted, using the term "saved" as if it was something natural, something we conjured up one day when we raised our hand and walked forward during the altar call. Being a Christian has become trendy. Bumper stickers and slogans abound. You've seen them: "I'm not perfect, just forgiven"; "NOW"; "WWJD"; "No Jesus, No Peace"; "Know Jesus, Know Peace"; "Life is Hell without Jesus"; "In case of rapture, this car will be unmanned"; and let us not forget the larger fish swallowing the DARWIN fish.

But if we understood the Biblical causes and significance of salvation, our approach would be anything but trite. Slogans would be banished. Bumper stickers would be revised. Worship styles and lyrics would be rethought and rewritten. Church services would not seek to make unbelievers "comfortable." In short, churches would act like the Church, not like a social gathering or a self-esteem pep rally. We would be more concerned about hearing a 2000 year old message than making church more "attractive."

Christians must echo the apostles' question: "Who then can be saved?" They also must internalize Christ's response: "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." Christ's words are both humbling and radical. He removes man from the salvation equation, leaving only God's work.

It appears that American Christians need a wake up call. They need to return to the simplicity and candidness of Jesus' message. Christianity Today published an article on "branding" Jesus. Our Lord and Savior has been reduced to one choice among many. The One and Only is preached and marketed as if He is the Many and Un-Unique.

Until we realize that Christ is both the "Author and Perfecter" of our faith, our striving for holiness will mean nothing. Why? Because "apart from [Him we] can do nothing." I think Michael Horton said it best...we must put "amazing back into grace."

So Close, Yet So Far

2008-12-14T13:33:00.000-08:00

We have all heard the call for a "deeper" or more "intimate" relationship with Jesus Christ. And, indeed, our souls long to grow in the "grace and knowledge" of Christ our Savior. Usually we are asked questions like, How often do you read the Bible? or How consistent is your prayer life? If we stop for a moment and reflect on these oft-repeated questions, we should immediately detect a problem. Although no true Christian would admit that they are saved by works, our attitudes and opinions towards Christian maturity reveal a deep-rooted belief that we are kept in a state of grace by our own power. It is as if God "began the work in us," but only "brings it to completion" when we allow.

Perhaps the greatest irony of living the Christian life is that God CANNOT and WILL NOT love Christians anymore than He does at this second. Why? Because His love is based on His Son's work and imputation of righteousness. The Father sees His Son when he looks at us. Drawing closer to the God is a misnomer - we are already intimately and eternally connected to Him. Unless, of course, we think the Father is not intimate with the Son.

The apostles call this being "in Christ." Theologians refer to it as the "mystical union." We are members of Christ's body; living stones in His temple. Christ is the Vine; we are the branches. He is the Head; we are the body.

Our longing for the sinlessness, then, should not rest on our abilities or lack thereof. We should ask ourselves: Are we still sewing fig leaves together for ourselves, or are we wearing the animal skins God has given? May we look to the bruise and battered Savior who lived, died, and rose for us. Let us fix our thoughts on what He has done and is doing. Comfort for the soul can only be found in the soul's Creator. And, gracious God that He is, He has already united us together with Him by giving us Christ's righteousness and the Holy Spirit.

We are already intimate with Him. He has lavished His on love us by making us His children. I believe Calvin was correct when he said "ingratitude" was the chief sin. After all, nothing can separate us from His love; yet, we still sin against Him. I hope that we daily view anew His mercy, grace, and love for us. Only that can motivate us to live lives filled with good works.

For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

Radical Christianity - Fallen Man's Starting Point

2008-12-11T20:37:00.000-08:00

This week I led a discussion at my church regarding the nature of man. Our conversation was prompted by "The Truth Project," a DVD series published through Focus on the Family. Both during and after the discussion, I was reminded how in-your-face Christianity is. The Bible's view of man does not tickle our ears. Rather, it smacks us right between the eyes. We may not like what the Bible says about us, but, at least we know what God thinks. And, as Scripture says, "Let God be true and every man a liar." Consider, then, the following verses regarding ourselves. I warn you, however, we may not like what we hear.

The final two verses of John 2 tell us that Jesus would not "entrust" himself to men because "He knew all men" and he "knew what was in man." This may not seem too radical. However, the verse prior to these two tells us that many people "believed in His name" and beheld "His signs which He was doing." John tells us that Jesus did not want the people "to bear witness concerning man." Our Lord did not want His divine miracles and words to be attributed to a mere mortal. We should not miss the connection here with Paul's statement in Romans 1. Paul says natural man "exchanges the truth of God for a lie, worshiping and serving the creature more than the Creator." The crux of all human rebellion against God is stripping God of His authority and putting ourselves in His role. Whether we desire to be God, or esteem another mortal as "holy" makes not difference. Either way, we give credit to man when all credit should be to God. As Paul says, "For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things. To whom be glory forever and ever. Amen."

It is not a mistake that John's next chapter tells us of Nicodemus. Christ told the Jewish leader that we are unable to "see" or "enter" the kingdom without the Spirit. Let us not mince words, here. That means we are blind and unable to open a gate or door to get into the house. These words of Christ are recapitulated by Paul in Romans and Corinthians. Romans 8:7-8 informs us that "natural" man "does not" and "cannot" submit to God's law because it is "hostile" to Him. We are His enemies. I Corinthians 2:14 reaffirms this point: "But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned."

Knowing this truth helps us focus on man's core issue, and provides us a strategy for witnessing. That is to say...if men are blind and unable to open the door to God, then their problem rests with God, not us Christians. When witnessing to non-believers, we should not worry about having the best logical answers to their questions. Neither should we worry about having a dramatic conversion experience to share. Salvation neither comes through reason nor experience. It comes through revelation. God must move before men can see. Remember...Jesus told Nicodemus he could not even "see" the kingdom of God that was right in front of his face. Thus, our method for witnessing should be to focus on the message of Scripture. That message is the "power of God unto salvation" (Rom 1). Men, women, and children become believers by "hearing" the "word of Christ" (Rom 10). God in His "foolishness" uses a message about an innocent man who lived, died, and rose for others.

May we never grow weary of this message. And, may we diligently seek to focus on this message when witnessing to blind and incapable men, always hoping that the Spirit illuminates their minds, hearts, ears, and eyes. We must do this because God alone is the "Author and Perfecter of our faith."

Introductions

2008-12-09T10:34:00.000-08:00

Yes...that's me driving my conversion van between Vegas and the Inland Empire. And, yes, those are my wife's glasses.

So why did I choose to start blogging? Is what I have to say of any importance, or am I just a narcissus who needs attention? Why on earth does the world need another blogger? Aren't we over-blogged as it is?

Here are my answers to the preceding questions: I don't know...you can judge, no...we don't...yes we are. Perhaps I was too quick in answering the first question. The truth is, I love to share opinions, both great and small.

Opinions are underrated, especially, and ironically, in our culture that values polls and statistics. It is bizarre that no one wants to give their opinions; yet, our scientifically-dominated culture prides itself on "discovering" the "truth." Of course, "truth" is defined as what is statistically most frequent. And, if someone has not done the "research" or is not an "expert," they seem to cower at sharing their thoughts.

I, for one, scoff at this approach to life. The triumph of scientific thinking has dampened human spontaneity. We have lost our souls - our passion. Far to often we are concerned about having a logical or experience-tested reason for thinking a thought, believing a creed, or performing an action.

Don't misunderstand me. Logic and reasonableness have their place. But so does emotion, feelings, and passion. I do not want to be in the business of championing only a portion of our creative abilities over another. God has made us passionate and logical beings. We need not bifurcate ourselves, concentrating on one over the other, or, worse, denigrating one at the expense of the other.

I leave you to ponder a quote from Emerson:

At present, man applies to nature but half his force. He works on the world with his understanding alone. He lives in it, and masters it by a penny-wisdom; and he that works most in it, is but a half-man... Nature 1836