The mission of Jesus Christ in His coming to earth is often misunderstood. Many people "draft" Christ into their various political or socio-economic missions: social justice, egalitarianism, moral culture, democracy, etc. Such gross anachronisms give weight to argumentation (who wouldn't want Jesus on their side?), but ultimately obscures and perverts His true mission. Each of these various causes betray the belief that Jesus was the best conjured-up expression of an idealized humanity, setting an example for all of the most noble causes. Such beliefs are actually an insult to Christ an His mission. He did not come to epitomize humanity, but to save humanity. He was able to do so, not only because of His perfect righteousness as a human, but also by virtue of His deity.
Man does not progress into a state of godlikeness--there is nothing godlike about man. Man is created in the image of God, but is still pure creation in direct contradistinction from the Creator. Man is universally sinful, regardless of individual sins (i.e. adultery, homosexuality, murder, etc.). All people stand in the same natural state before God: rebels deserving of wrath. The forgiveness of sins does not capture the work of Christ, because human beings are sinners. People need to be forgiven--not simply thoughts, words, or deeds.
Therefore, any attempt to obscure the mission of Christ, the God-man, who lived the life that man couldn't live and died the death man couldn't bare--in order to save those who believed--is an insult to the power of God and callous toward the true needs of man. With regard to the persistent wrath of God against a rebel creation, man does not need a liberator of an economic, social, or political variety--but a Savior from sin. This need sets all sinners on level ground before the foot of the cross.
The Christian realizes (or should) this reality, and thus offers herself to the glory of God in a state of gratitude. This gratitude is not a mere legalism, nor is it a license to sin. It brings about a love in the Christian that reflects the love of God for sinners and seeks the salvation of all, that the world might indirectly be made more just, and ultimately, that God's name would once again fall upon the lips of His fallen creation. Here is one example of such gratitude in the African context from this past summer:
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Monday, April 21, 2008
The Second Commandment
Exodus 20: 4(E) "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5(F) You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am(G) a jealous God,(H) visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6but showing steadfast love to thousands[b] of those who love me and keep my commandments."
I remember once reading a book about the Second Commandment and learning that there was more to it than is commonly understood in modern times. Many people like myself have understood this commandment as simply prohibiting the worshipping idols, as opposed to God. Yet it is not merely foreign idols that are delineated in this commandment, but "carved images" of any sort. This includes images made of the true God. When I read this, I shared this information with fellow Reformed Christians who casually dismissed such an assertion, but as I continue to read--this is the traditional position of Reformed Christians since the Reformation and even existed in earlier centuries when the debate over the use of icons within the Church gained full steam.
In relation to the First Commandment's "who" with regard to worship, the Second Commandment provides the "how." Specifically-speaking, we are not to use any images in our worship of the Lord. Our faith is one belonging to the ear (the preached Word), with two specific sacraments offered for our visual edification (baptism and communion). It is God alone who reveals Himself and to pull Him down in any form not prescribed by Scripture is to "attempt a peek at God in the nude" (Luther). More broadly-speaking then, we are not to worship God on our own terms, but on His terms. This application has taken the form of the Regulative Principle of Worship in the Reformed community, which sets forth that our substantial elements of worship must be specifically prescribed by Scripture.
Of course, this new learning comes to one who watched "The Passion of the Christ" three times in the movie theaters. In our age of do-it-yourself Christianity, such traditional (and biblical) understandings of how we are to worship our God is difficult, but refreshing.
I remember once reading a book about the Second Commandment and learning that there was more to it than is commonly understood in modern times. Many people like myself have understood this commandment as simply prohibiting the worshipping idols, as opposed to God. Yet it is not merely foreign idols that are delineated in this commandment, but "carved images" of any sort. This includes images made of the true God. When I read this, I shared this information with fellow Reformed Christians who casually dismissed such an assertion, but as I continue to read--this is the traditional position of Reformed Christians since the Reformation and even existed in earlier centuries when the debate over the use of icons within the Church gained full steam.
In relation to the First Commandment's "who" with regard to worship, the Second Commandment provides the "how." Specifically-speaking, we are not to use any images in our worship of the Lord. Our faith is one belonging to the ear (the preached Word), with two specific sacraments offered for our visual edification (baptism and communion). It is God alone who reveals Himself and to pull Him down in any form not prescribed by Scripture is to "attempt a peek at God in the nude" (Luther). More broadly-speaking then, we are not to worship God on our own terms, but on His terms. This application has taken the form of the Regulative Principle of Worship in the Reformed community, which sets forth that our substantial elements of worship must be specifically prescribed by Scripture.
Of course, this new learning comes to one who watched "The Passion of the Christ" three times in the movie theaters. In our age of do-it-yourself Christianity, such traditional (and biblical) understandings of how we are to worship our God is difficult, but refreshing.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
An Executive Traitor
Former President Jimmy Carter is currently meeting with members of the terrorist organization, Hamas, and will soon be meeting with their leader. Hamas is one of the more prominent terrorist organization, condemned by the vast majority of the international community. They have murdered over twenty Americans, countless Israelis, and doubtless many Muslims who have proven themselves "infidels" in some form or another.
For any American official to consort with these heinous criminals is morally abhorrent; for the former leader of the free world to do so is despicable (even that is an understatement). In a bipartisan plea, 50 members of Congress today called upon Carter to cancel the meetings. The Bush Administration and Israel's government are both infuriated. Not only is such a move immoral, but it is also politically disastrous as it legitimates a heartless, criminal enterprise.
When a young man from California was found amidst al-Qaida troops in Afghanistan a few years ago, he was rounded up with the other prisoners of war, branded a traitor, and taken captive by allied forces. While such an extravagant move cannot properly be employed against a former President, there should currently be a discussion on Capitol Hill concerning whether charges of treachery and aiding and abetting known terrorists should be drawn against Carter, as well as possibly barring Carter from U.S. territory as one who has consulted with enemies of the free world.
There was once a time when former Presidents upheld the dignity of their office by working in a non-partisan way toward good causes, e.g. former Presidents Bush and Clinton joining together to aid the victims of the tsunami in southeast Asia. With Clinton now playing the part of schoolyard political bully for his wife and Carter hobnobbing with Hamas, Americans may duly feel ashamed and disappointed.
For any American official to consort with these heinous criminals is morally abhorrent; for the former leader of the free world to do so is despicable (even that is an understatement). In a bipartisan plea, 50 members of Congress today called upon Carter to cancel the meetings. The Bush Administration and Israel's government are both infuriated. Not only is such a move immoral, but it is also politically disastrous as it legitimates a heartless, criminal enterprise.
When a young man from California was found amidst al-Qaida troops in Afghanistan a few years ago, he was rounded up with the other prisoners of war, branded a traitor, and taken captive by allied forces. While such an extravagant move cannot properly be employed against a former President, there should currently be a discussion on Capitol Hill concerning whether charges of treachery and aiding and abetting known terrorists should be drawn against Carter, as well as possibly barring Carter from U.S. territory as one who has consulted with enemies of the free world.
There was once a time when former Presidents upheld the dignity of their office by working in a non-partisan way toward good causes, e.g. former Presidents Bush and Clinton joining together to aid the victims of the tsunami in southeast Asia. With Clinton now playing the part of schoolyard political bully for his wife and Carter hobnobbing with Hamas, Americans may duly feel ashamed and disappointed.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
The Wise and Perverse
Biblical wisdom is that ability to rightly discern the created order (and twisting thereof), which logically produces action consistent with that understanding. Romans 1 speaks of the inability of a sinful mankind to comprehend their rebellion against mankind, which in turn produces action consistent with that rebellion--namely, participation in the fallen order and the twisting of creature-to-creature relationships (for example, homosexuality). Thus, homosexuality speaks of the brokenness of this world and the wisdom that desires it rightly ordered.
That said, the perverse may still be instruments of insight. Christopher Isherwood, gay author of The Single Man, portrays that lifestyle as more of a philosophical critique of society than a caving to perverse desires. Such a portrayal demands a nuancing of homosexuality that is quite foreign to many Christians. Even in the foolishness of his rebellion, Isherwood has the ability to step back and view his lifestyle in relation to a quickly-crumbling American society. Having cast off notions of a higher authority, Isherwood saw Americans as unwitting players in a sort of social determinism: studying, graduating, marrying, working, reproducing, dying. Their ignorance concerning their numb, mediocre existence made Isherwood's homosexuality alluring--not merely as a lifestyle choice, but as an act of rebellion against a social structure gone mad.
Thomas Hardy once wrote that "If a way to the better there be, it exacts a full look at the worst." This means not only a clear-minded view of homosexuality and the sadist heterosexuality of a Normal Mailer, but also an understanding of the gravity of their depravity. In other words, those in the muck often see the muck better than the self-righteous, and offer sterling insights that enable those with loyalty to the King to better understand the perversity of the world. Social determinism numbs the heart and mind to true beauty and genius; social Darwinism allows for wicked ideals to ravage true community while the blind remain blind. America, in its advanced state of science of technology, has detached itself from the reflective roots which produced some of the most ingenious documents and societal foresight and given itself over to shallow, unreflective living and entertainment-induced passivity.
And in the knowledge of the vacuous and mundane, a need for a better existence is impressed upon the human heart.
That said, the perverse may still be instruments of insight. Christopher Isherwood, gay author of The Single Man, portrays that lifestyle as more of a philosophical critique of society than a caving to perverse desires. Such a portrayal demands a nuancing of homosexuality that is quite foreign to many Christians. Even in the foolishness of his rebellion, Isherwood has the ability to step back and view his lifestyle in relation to a quickly-crumbling American society. Having cast off notions of a higher authority, Isherwood saw Americans as unwitting players in a sort of social determinism: studying, graduating, marrying, working, reproducing, dying. Their ignorance concerning their numb, mediocre existence made Isherwood's homosexuality alluring--not merely as a lifestyle choice, but as an act of rebellion against a social structure gone mad.
Thomas Hardy once wrote that "If a way to the better there be, it exacts a full look at the worst." This means not only a clear-minded view of homosexuality and the sadist heterosexuality of a Normal Mailer, but also an understanding of the gravity of their depravity. In other words, those in the muck often see the muck better than the self-righteous, and offer sterling insights that enable those with loyalty to the King to better understand the perversity of the world. Social determinism numbs the heart and mind to true beauty and genius; social Darwinism allows for wicked ideals to ravage true community while the blind remain blind. America, in its advanced state of science of technology, has detached itself from the reflective roots which produced some of the most ingenious documents and societal foresight and given itself over to shallow, unreflective living and entertainment-induced passivity.
And in the knowledge of the vacuous and mundane, a need for a better existence is impressed upon the human heart.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Reformed Theology as Covenantal Theology
In a past entry, the assertion was made that Reformed theology was at its foundation covenantal theology--that is, the bountiful and beautiful truths offered in Reformed Christianity are rooted in God's covenantal relationship with His people.
There are three covenants revealed in Scripture: the Covenant of Redemption, the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace. The proper understanding of the latter two covenants is essential for a biblical theology. Within these categories, the majesty of God's character and the gravity of Christ's atoning work is put on display with an unequaled profundity.
A former classmate, Brennan Ellis, now working on his doctorate at St. Andrews in Scotland, produced a helpful summary of these covenants at his website, creedorchaos. Follow this link: http://creedorchaos.wordpress.com/2008/04/10/covenant-theology-is-reformed-theology/
Enjoy!
There are three covenants revealed in Scripture: the Covenant of Redemption, the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace. The proper understanding of the latter two covenants is essential for a biblical theology. Within these categories, the majesty of God's character and the gravity of Christ's atoning work is put on display with an unequaled profundity.
A former classmate, Brennan Ellis, now working on his doctorate at St. Andrews in Scotland, produced a helpful summary of these covenants at his website, creedorchaos. Follow this link: http://creedorchaos.wordpress.com/2008/04/10/covenant-theology-is-reformed-theology/
Enjoy!
Friday, April 4, 2008
Honoring MLK
It is tempting to take those who have slipped the surly bonds of this broken world and make them into other-worldly figures. Myths come to enshroud certain historical figures--perhaps giving them added power of inspiration but denying that inspiration the grounds for moving the average person today. George Washington could not tell a lie about chopping down the cherry tree, yet every person does lie, as evidenced by the propagation of the cherry tree myth. Since when did transcendence become a higher historical value than accessibility?
Martin Luther King Jr. was a plagiarist and known adulterer. History has forgiven him as well it should, but should his shady side be diminished in order to propagate a mythical figure with the power to inspire, yet bereft of the power to move people? His transgressions, when put in the context of his mighty struggle for basic personhood, prove him to be a more mighty person because he was human, through and through. He was a flawed man seeking justice from a flawed society with flawed rules.
Never should children be told myths, for then mere mortals will fail at attempts to change the world because their heroes are lost to transcendence. Let a child say "I want to be like Martin Luther King" without feeling the pangs of being unable to measure up. For MLK certainly envisioned a society where every person has the opportunity to be hero. He demanded that opportunity, and if society is to respect his legacy, it will demand the same by making its heroes accessible to the average person.
Martin Luther King Jr. was a plagiarist and known adulterer. History has forgiven him as well it should, but should his shady side be diminished in order to propagate a mythical figure with the power to inspire, yet bereft of the power to move people? His transgressions, when put in the context of his mighty struggle for basic personhood, prove him to be a more mighty person because he was human, through and through. He was a flawed man seeking justice from a flawed society with flawed rules.
Never should children be told myths, for then mere mortals will fail at attempts to change the world because their heroes are lost to transcendence. Let a child say "I want to be like Martin Luther King" without feeling the pangs of being unable to measure up. For MLK certainly envisioned a society where every person has the opportunity to be hero. He demanded that opportunity, and if society is to respect his legacy, it will demand the same by making its heroes accessible to the average person.
Daily News
So...for the second straight day at Fenway Park (home of the Red Sox), a hawk attacked a visiting tourist. This time, the victim was a young girl. She had to go to a hospital for a scratch on her head. When will we say enough is enough? As long as these hawks roam the land, free from any sane regulations, they will pose a threat to the well-being of average, ordinary Americans. If I was a politician, I would introduce legislation in which every hawk would be assigned a "safety tether" that would prevent them from accidentally implementing their destructive power. This will be for their own good and the safety of your children.
******************************************************************************
President Bush and Russia's Tyrant-in-Chief, Vladimir Putin, will be meeting in the next several days to discuss a wide range of issues. Many believe that these meeting could be "contentious." Really? Vladimir Putin has interfered in the elections of neighboring nations in order to exert Russian influence, has eliminated an impressive number of independent journalists (even those residing in democratic Western countries), and has virtually destroyed independent businesses and media in his country. Meanwhile, President Bush has gotten approval from the NATO allies to install missile defense positions in several former Soviet republics in eastern Europe. Contentious? Perhaps we'll have a repeat of Rocky IV. Stay tuned...
******************************************************************************
Another bout of tornadoes have beset poor Little Rock, Arkansas, which boasts the former political residence of Bill Clinton. Tornadoes in populated areas bring about unsurpassed tragedies, but tornadoes in the boonies where chasers can get kick-butt footage...awesome! In reality, with all due respect to victims of tornadoes, what guy would not want to see a good F-4 or F-5? In a society of incredible wealth and weenie challenges, a tornado is just what a guy needs to realize that typical man activities totally suck.
******************************************************************************
President Bush and Russia's Tyrant-in-Chief, Vladimir Putin, will be meeting in the next several days to discuss a wide range of issues. Many believe that these meeting could be "contentious." Really? Vladimir Putin has interfered in the elections of neighboring nations in order to exert Russian influence, has eliminated an impressive number of independent journalists (even those residing in democratic Western countries), and has virtually destroyed independent businesses and media in his country. Meanwhile, President Bush has gotten approval from the NATO allies to install missile defense positions in several former Soviet republics in eastern Europe. Contentious? Perhaps we'll have a repeat of Rocky IV. Stay tuned...
******************************************************************************
Another bout of tornadoes have beset poor Little Rock, Arkansas, which boasts the former political residence of Bill Clinton. Tornadoes in populated areas bring about unsurpassed tragedies, but tornadoes in the boonies where chasers can get kick-butt footage...awesome! In reality, with all due respect to victims of tornadoes, what guy would not want to see a good F-4 or F-5? In a society of incredible wealth and weenie challenges, a tornado is just what a guy needs to realize that typical man activities totally suck.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Spontaneous Observations
So the other night, two of my housemates--Dan and Buttsis--and I were all going to bed. Dan turned to me and initiated the following exchange:
Dan: Night night. I'll see you in dreamland.
Steve: Umm...Dan...I don't think I care to talk to you anymore.
Dan: I'll see you in 15 minutes.
Steve: Dan, I'm not sure we should put a time frame-
Dan: I'll go get ready.
With exasperation, I went into my room and slammed the door--clearly at a loss for words.
____________________________________________________________________
Today was D-Day +1 in my fight against the larvae in our house food pantry. It has not been pretty. The warfare was preempted by the presumption of said larvae (and consequently, moth-like things) to occupy a place in our pantry and not pay rent. A few moths fluttering around the house is no problem, but when I pay a buttload of money each month, they sure as heck should not be attaching their eggs to my chocolate bars and packets of oatmeal. Imagine if each of these assorted larvae and moth-things paid rent--divided equally (as they assume equal living rights), I'd probably be paying $3 a day in rent!
In any case, like the black ant invasion of aught seven, these insects are not going down without a fight. More and more of them are seeking safe haven in my bedroom, which is so not cool. Unlike the black ants, however, they are little more than a nuisance (unless one finds them in their breakfast). As I tried to wash thousands of ants from my box of granola bars last year, they tried to advance my arm, biting along the way. Thankfully, the ants are defeated and the larvae are being subdued, but the ordeals are still gross-tastic.
___________________________________________________________________
Seminarians are great at answering their own questions in class, without even asking the question in the first place. There should be a ten words or less policy on question-asking. It is remarkable how many times a student will ask "Does X remind you of Y?" with X being the lecture material and Y being an unknown point of comparison that then must be expounded upon in order for the professor to make some sort of intelligible comment. What a scam! If ever a seminary professor in such cases, I will walk over to said student, drop a fresh Abe Lincoln on his desk, thank him for his instruction of the class, and tell him that I will be writing his course evaluation. It reminds me of a recent preaching class where a critic not only made his critique but explained how he would have handled the passage differently.
Said one well-known young professor at a sister-seminary, "It's funny how often seminarians compare the size of their book cases while more normal men will just whip it out." To my fellow seminarians: put the bookcase away--no one cares about the size nor want to peruse the shelves. Go eat a Big Mac, find a girlfriend and take her to a PG-13 movie, and for God's sake get some sun!
Dan: Night night. I'll see you in dreamland.
Steve: Umm...Dan...I don't think I care to talk to you anymore.
Dan: I'll see you in 15 minutes.
Steve: Dan, I'm not sure we should put a time frame-
Dan: I'll go get ready.
With exasperation, I went into my room and slammed the door--clearly at a loss for words.
____________________________________________________________________
Today was D-Day +1 in my fight against the larvae in our house food pantry. It has not been pretty. The warfare was preempted by the presumption of said larvae (and consequently, moth-like things) to occupy a place in our pantry and not pay rent. A few moths fluttering around the house is no problem, but when I pay a buttload of money each month, they sure as heck should not be attaching their eggs to my chocolate bars and packets of oatmeal. Imagine if each of these assorted larvae and moth-things paid rent--divided equally (as they assume equal living rights), I'd probably be paying $3 a day in rent!
In any case, like the black ant invasion of aught seven, these insects are not going down without a fight. More and more of them are seeking safe haven in my bedroom, which is so not cool. Unlike the black ants, however, they are little more than a nuisance (unless one finds them in their breakfast). As I tried to wash thousands of ants from my box of granola bars last year, they tried to advance my arm, biting along the way. Thankfully, the ants are defeated and the larvae are being subdued, but the ordeals are still gross-tastic.
___________________________________________________________________
Seminarians are great at answering their own questions in class, without even asking the question in the first place. There should be a ten words or less policy on question-asking. It is remarkable how many times a student will ask "Does X remind you of Y?" with X being the lecture material and Y being an unknown point of comparison that then must be expounded upon in order for the professor to make some sort of intelligible comment. What a scam! If ever a seminary professor in such cases, I will walk over to said student, drop a fresh Abe Lincoln on his desk, thank him for his instruction of the class, and tell him that I will be writing his course evaluation. It reminds me of a recent preaching class where a critic not only made his critique but explained how he would have handled the passage differently.
Said one well-known young professor at a sister-seminary, "It's funny how often seminarians compare the size of their book cases while more normal men will just whip it out." To my fellow seminarians: put the bookcase away--no one cares about the size nor want to peruse the shelves. Go eat a Big Mac, find a girlfriend and take her to a PG-13 movie, and for God's sake get some sun!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)