Thinking when we watch!

Some Good TV episodes for ethical and spiritual reflection. [Note - I said refection not education are we clear people!]

Battlestar Galactica.

Ever since I got hooked on Battlestar Galactica a couple of years ago, I noticed not-so-subtle references to Judeo-Christian theological influences. There are countless examples throughout the show: a “chosen” or select group of survivors traveling great distances trying to find the prophesied “home”; and the twelve tribes of mankind, the debates of spiritual vs. material reality. The influence is almost exclusively the use of archetypal character arches and not some subversive plot of Hollywood to destroy the faith. But like most on the SyFy channel it is always a little bit off at times. Either way it is always-good drama to talk about with other old-time of the genre and the occasional SyFy neophytes.

•“Flesh and Bone” (season 1, episode 8) - Compelling scenes with aural allusions to waterboarding and torture, as well as rich dialogue about the being human and being an artificial life form.

Other good episodes are

“Guess What’s Coming to Dinner” (season 4, episode 7)
“No Exit” (season 4, episode 15),
“Deadlock” (season 4, episode 16),
“Someone to Watch Over Me” (season 4, episode 17),
“Islanded in a Stream of Stars” (season 4, episode 18),
“Daybreak parts II & III” (season 4, episodes 20 and 21)

Lost – Thanks to Mark D. Liederbach for turning me on to this show, (you just got to love TV on DVD!)

•“White Rabbit” (season 1, episode 5) - two scenes from this episode are great - jack Shepard tells the group that they have to learn to live together or die alone, and the other in which John Locke speaks dramatically about looking into the eye of the island and seeing its beauty.

•“Exodus part 2” (season 1, episodes 24/25) – there is a a rich discussion between Jack and Locke on science and faith.

•“There’s No Place Like Home, parts 2 & 3” (season 4, episode 13) - Locke says the island is a place where miracles happen and tries to persuade Jack to stay on the island.

House. – this show is a train of bioethical questions and sometimes the train wrecks.

•“Informed Consent” (season 3, episode 3) - Here we have multiple scenes featuring a patient who wishes to die and not be treated while Dr. House tricks him into continuing testing/treatment.

•“Damned if You Do, Damned if You Don’t” (season 1, episode 5) – It has a scene where Dr. House and a nun with a mysterious ailment debate God and faith.

•“The Socratic Method” (season 1, episode 6) - I strongly encourage the scene with Dr. House and his nemesis Dr. Cuddy about the ethics of using unapproved protocols to shrink a patient’s tumor so it could be operated on. It is very interesting!

(Roll credits!!!)

In the end I ask myself…. Do I watch to much TV? Sadly a little vices whispers yes.. ….

Are we wired fro music?

For all My Musical friends and the Science geeks repressed deep within them I suggest the world science festival this year one of the panel discussion was on
“Notes & Neurons” See the full discussion here.

They asked the questions Is our response to music hard-wired or culturally determined? Is the reaction to rhythm and melody universal or influenced by environment? The only name you may recognize is Bobby McFerrin but the other smart guys on the panel are Jamshed Barucha, scientist Daniel Levitin, and Professor Lawrence Parsons it was hosted by John Schaefer.

At one point, I was pleasantly surprised to see Bobby McFerrin give this simple, fun, and extremely effective demonstration of the universality of the pentatonic scale. Also, McFerrin made me raise my ear brows and smirk with approval when he gave the following quote:

“Music for me is like a spiritual journey down into the depths of my soul. And I like to think we’re all on a journey into our souls. What’s down there? That’s why I do what I do.”

Below is a clip the demonstration begins around 2:30 min into the clip.

World Science Festival 2009: Bobby McFerrin Demonstrates the Power of the Pentatonic Scale from World Science Festival on Vimeo.

Advice on having a Personal Library

I find television to be very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go in the other room and read a book. ~Groucho Marx

I wish I could say I was that much of a reader. As most know, I am dyslexic and that means that people like me are not known to play nice with books. Yet I persist in being a paradox for I love those pesky buggers that nest in books, most call them "ideas". Over the years, I have collected a number of books and have them in my own 'Aviary'. Most call it a 'library'. In this post, I wish to pass on some wisdom I have learned from other "book people" farther along on there journey than I. Most of these thoughts come from “How We May Manage Our Libraries to the Best Advantage: Ten Directions,” by Tom Lyon, in The Banner of Truth, Issue 543 (December, 2008), pp. 15-17. I have lightly edited this work and added my thoughts in Italics the points in bold.

Direction 1. Always reckon that the best book to be read, the first book to be read and, often, the only book to be read, is God’s book.

The books that the world calls immortal are often the books that show us our own shame. The bible goes beyond shame to Redemption, identity, hope, and the God in whom we (who believe) hear speak thru the bible!

Direction 2. Give no credit to that opinion which holds bookishness in religion in suspicion or contempt.

Direction 3. Do not simply be a collector of books. Retain them not for the number, beauty, antiquity, rarity, value, or mere possession of them.

IT is The Ideas people: the IDEAS!!

Direction 4. Mortify your library. That which you shelve may be construed as the measure of that which you approve.

Unless you do like I do and take one shelf to be your congregation of heretics. Not reading non-Christian books is a great way to never understand the world around you. The key is never reading too much and always reading with your faith in view even if it is fiction. It can become a game; I call it "find the lie" (also called, "find the ticket to hell").

Direction 5. Reckon that, contrary to popular expectation, those books lately written may be inferior to those of another day.

Direction 6. Judge the importance of a book, not by the author’s exuberance or the publisher’s notices, but by the relative weight assigned that topic in God’s book. Weak books struggle through the press with ease nowadays which, strangely, impresses the unwary.

Direction 7. Do not give, lend, or recommend a book which you have not read. Do not trust an author just because he has written helpfully once, or upon one subject.

And if a book never returns to you and the good ones never do take confort in Voltaire's words, "Only your friends steal your books."

Direction 8. Care for your books. Esteem them as friends, for there may be times when they will be the only friends you have!

AMEN AMEN AMEN!!! They have a spine but no arms! So they can teach you how to stand up for yourself but can't stab you in the back. I like how Groucho Marx puts it, "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read."

Direction 9. (A) Always read widely. Avoid the accumulation of devotional material. Sermons are, generally, better heard than read. (B) Read with discrimination. Be quick to part company with that book which fails to promote sound doctrine, solid thought, balanced inference, experiential godliness, and esteem for Christ.

I don't totally agree with nine, think there is wisdom in it though. I would like to qualify this point by saying that reading great sermons trains you in the logic and rhetoric of preaching making you a better listener and speaker, no matter what your vocation. As for discrimination in reading I would agree and add to close yourself off to only what you consider as right and sound is more arrogance and a path to self-deception than discernment. Better learn to eat the meat and throw away the bone. Even Nietzsche was accurate on much of his diagnosis of the modern situation; it is the answers they give to the problems (like in Nietzsche case) that were often in error. As James Bryce wrote "The worth of a book is to be measured by what you can carry away from it." No matter the type of book it is the reader that must do the hard work of walking away with something - even if all you learned was what not to believe.

Direction 10. Never be found without a book nearby.

why? Because books are important! Like I stated at the beginning I love ideas and I think they are important. Ideas not only color our world but act as the means to the meaning of life. William James speaks to this in his pragmatic definition of truth. "The true is the name of whatever proves itself to be good in the way of belief." While not a great definition of absolute truth, James is on to something. What James means by truth can be better understood as meaning. The 'meaning' people attribute to things can be true or false but those ideas in the mind of a person (a belief) will always color the world they live in. By the ideas we ascribe too(believe) we construct a meaning for the world. It is by that meaning we understand and are guided in this world.

Concluding Thoughts

In conclusion, the ideas that give meaning to our world often come from the books we read, the company we keep, and the things we give ourselves to. As the weak-wristed playwright Oscar Wilde his noted, "It is what you read when you don't have to that determines what you will be when you can't help it." His words make be wonder what he reads? His point makes be want to read better books. It is in them we find the ideas that form the substance of who we are.

So what is a man's library? It is the home of all ideas, a collection of bricks that give substance to his soul. And a good library is a hospital for human character. A peaceful place, where a great ‘cloud of witnesses’ can train your heart in the wisdom of the ages. As Samuel Davies has once written, "I have a peaceful study as a refuge from the hurries and noise of the world around me. The venerable dead are waiting in my library to entertain me and relieve me from the nonsense of surviving mortals." The venerable dead await to teach us the greater part of being human. Why not collect the ideas of men once departed and find seeds of contemplation that can grow to be the destiny of a man.

What is a man’s library but the evidence of who he will someday be?

The Wisdom of Charnock

Stephen Charnock's great work ‘The Existence And Attributes Of God,’ has its origin in a series of sermons Charnock preached at Bishopgate Street Presbyterian Church, London, from 1675 until his death in 1680. The work indicative of late puritan thought is a clear and systematic exposition of Who God is (it's a bit long too, another puritan trait). One interesting note is his view of wisdom.

Charnock on wisdom

Charnock’s gift for precise definitions is well known but his view on wisdom is not. Building off of the nature of God as wise, He first defined wisdom as “acting for the right end” and as “observing all circumstances for action.”[1] Then using the theological content of God's wisdom to inform his understanding of human wisdom, he constructed his veiw. In his thought divine wisdom acted as a paradigm for human wisdom. Charnock concluded that wisdom was the result, at least on a human level, of four areas of thinking. We will call them the four Ts of wise thinking.

TACTICS – knowing what methods to apply in a particular situation.
TEMPO – knowing at what rate and in what order to apply those methods
TIMING – knowing when and when not to apply those methods
TARGETING – knowing how to apply those methods with the correct individual/audience

The above ‘Ts’ form a marked contrast with the traditional concept of ‘strategy,’ which consists of ‘goal setting’ and a planned marshalling of resources to accomplish those goals.[2] Showing Charlock to understand the important of the contexts in which choices are made to be as important as the goal toward which our strategies are directed. Next time you need to think wisely try mentally walking through Charlock’s four ‘Ts’.

Endnotes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Charnock ‘The Existence And Attributes Of God,’ V1 p.507

[2] The word ‘Strategy’ is derived from the Ancient Greek word ‘stratēgos,’ meaning military commander or general. See http://www.answers.com/topic/strategy

Quotes to Ponder

Quotes on Culture and Christianity

“Every high civilization decays by forgetting obvious things” [1]

If one asks whether the traffic of influence flows more strongly from Christian churches to secular culture or from secular culture to the churches, it is plain that the secular deities of common culture influence the church far more than the God of the Christian faith influences the culture. Efficiency more than godliness is the criterion by which the pastor's success in a church is measured. Budget rather than vision determines policy. In many electronic churches of the conservative evangelical sort, high technology is used shrewdly, and skills in making money are practiced in the name of Christ, even under the sign of the cross. [2]

Although we might like to hold a fond illusion that the church is in the world, converting the world from secularism to Christianity, the fact is that the world is in the church, converting the church to secularism. [3]

The christian world has a temporal task, an earthly task to fulfil: an earthly task, since a civilisation, as civilisation, is directly ordered to a specific temporal end; an earthly christian task, since by hypothesis this civilisation is a christian one, since the world which is in question has received the light of the Gospel. This temporal task of the christian world is to work here on earth for a realisation in social and temporal terms of the truths of the Gospel: for if the Gospel is primarily concerned with the things of eternal life, and infinitely [4]

Quotes on Marriage and Family

“When we step into the family, by the act of being born, we do step into a world which is incalculable, into a world which has its own strange laws, into a world which could do without us, into a world we have not made. In other words, when we step into the family we step into a fairy-tale.” [5]

“What is called matriarchy was simply moral anarchy, in which the mother alone remained fixed because all the fathers were fugitive and irresponsible.” [6]

“All the things that make monogamy a success are, in their nature, un-dramatic things: the silent growth of an instinctive confidence, the common wounds and victories, the accumulation of customs, the rich maturing of old jokes.[7]

Quotes About God and belief

What makes the biblical God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, different is that he takes pleasure in and responds to the reflection of his eternal Self in the mirror of creation, partaking not only of a Reality and Bliss that lies beyond our comprehension but, no less, the ups and downs, woes and weals of creaturely existence. This God is a participant in creation all the way through, the One who holds us in his hand so we can hear his story, listens in return as we tell ours, and, even, in the wondrous expanse of creation, allows us to hold him in return. Further, because God not only tells the story but hears and comprehends it, nothing is lost. From God to God in God. [8]

…in all honest religion there is something that is hateful to the prosperous compromise of our time. You are free, in our time, to say that God does not exist; you are free to say that He exists and is evil; you are free to say (like poor old Renan) that He would like to exist if He could. You may talk of God as a metaphor or a mystification; you may water Him down with gallons of long words, or boil Him to the rags of metaphysics; and it is not merely that nobody punishes, but nobody protests. But, if you speak of God as a fact, as a thing, like a tiger, as a reason for changing one’s conduct, then the modern world will stop you somehow, if it can. We are long past talking about whether an unbeliever should be punished for being irreverent. It is now thought irreverent to be a believer.[9]


Endnotes
----------------------------------------------------------

[1] Gilbert Keith Chesterton, The Collected Works of G.K. Chesterton: Christendon in Dublin, Irish Impressions, The New Jerusalem, A Short History of England. Vol. 20, James V. Schall. (San fran. Ignatius Press, 1986) 211

[2]. Waldo Beach, Christian Ethics in the Protestant Tradition [book on-line] (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988, accessed 5 November 2008), 7; available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=27957131; Internet.

[3]. Waldo Beach, Christian Ethics in the Protestant Tradition [book on-line] (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988, accessed 5 November 2008), 7; available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=27957131; Internet.

[4]. Jacques Maritain, True Humanism [book on-line] (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1938, accessed 28 January 2009), 34; available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=91321499; Internet.

[5] Gilbert Keith Chesterton, The Collected Works of G.K. Chesterton: Christendon in Dublin, Irish Impressions, The New Jerusalem, A Short History of England. Vol. 1, James V. Schall. (San fran. Ignatius Press, 1986) 143

[6]. G. K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man [book on-line] (Garden City, NY: Image Books, 1955, accessed 21 January 2009), 53; available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=6237268; Internet.

[7] George Bernard Shaw by G. K. Chesterton (London: John Lane, 1909) pp.191

[8]. Richard L. Fern, Nature, God, and Humanity: Envisioning an Ethics of Nature [book on-line] (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2002, accessed 28 January 2009), 146; available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=105096511; Internet.

[9] George Bernard Shaw by G. K. Chesterton (London: John Lane, 1909) pp. 231-232

James Bond on Marriage

When I say James bond do you think of marriage. For me, I think of Ursula Andress or Jane Seymour and how after one night with Mr. Bond can be transformed from a cold hearted temptress/Assassin to a altruistic heroine fighting with James (I mean Mr. Bond).

As for many Male's, James Bond is a mythic legend, half man, half hormone. A super spy, who possesses the virility of 10 men and has “mad, crazy, skillz” when it comes to saving the world and not fathering any children. I remember watching Gold-finger for the 6th time and thinking, "How does he do that. She was going to kill him, he kisses her then *bam*, she is willing to die for him?" Wow, talk about good loven…. but I digress. My point is marriage is not the first thing to pop into your head when you think “Bond, James Bond”.

One of the most famous actors to play James Bond, Sean Connery has been married for 32 years. Yes, to the same woman. Hollywood’s most famous James Bond is all about the faithfulness. He credits his marriage's longevity not to what he learned playing bond (though, sex so great it can invoke self-sacrifice, really can only help fidelity). Connery believes that the language barrier between him and his French wife is the reason for their successful marriage. They met in 1972 and married that same year.

Connery credits the success of his happy 32-year long marriage to his inability to speak the same language as his wife, he states. "I don't speak a word of French but often think that what should be a handicap is actually a godsend." He continues, "She may be half my size, but she's got a few snappy comebacks. We're total opposites - that's what has kept us together all these years."

While it can be assumed that his wife Micheline Roquebrune Connery can speak English. It can also be assumed she more than likely curses in French. Next to being a little hot, I’m sure it can’t hurt not knowing weather her passionate French monologue is telling you to take out the trash or defaming your character. I have a French friend, he taught me a little. The French language is just beautiful and cursing in French is, well, like wiping your butt with silk.. but I digress..

Connery's point is French woman make great wives but poor partners for playing "twenty five thousand dolor pyramid" (If you don’t get that joke, google it or go watch the game show network). Seriously, Connery's testimony teaches us that in marriage differences make a difference and marital love transcends language even for James Bond.

Meditations on Faith

I have been thinking about the idea of having a personal relationship with Christ. But what does "personal relationship" mean? It sounds good and makes us feel warm like a microwaved jelly donut, but what is it really? I think the concept of a personal relationship is imbedded in the biblical concept of faith.

"Into Faith"

First, We have salvation now and eternally if we believe into Jesus. I use the word "into" for a reason. The concept of faith is an “into” concept. Faith in John's gospel best explains this consept. This “believing into” phrase appears in John some 36 times and only 8 elsewhere in the New Testament [ii] "Believing into" is an expression of what is now described in the commonly used religious phrase "personal relationship with Jesus." John uses this phrase to speak of simple faith. So a personal relationship is equal to simple faith.

Simple faith

The word “simple” is not to imply it is ignorant trust or some gullible mental assent. Simple is used to imply that this faith is not complex. This lack of complexity rises from the fact that it is a relational concept. Faith in John’s gospel does not just believe about Jesus (intellectually) like the way someone would believe the First President is Washington or the U.S. capital is Washington D.C. Jonh's concept of Faith is a believing into Jesus (relationally). [i] Such faith can only be in reference to another person. It is a subject-to-subject kind of trust, commitment and loyalty. So “Believing into” is when someone places faith into a person. By such simple faith, Jesus becomes a personal mediator for those that believe into him. “This means to entrust oneself to Jesus, fully accepting what he proclaims himself to be.”[iii]
Now this “believing into” is not without evidence. You can only believe into someone you know is willing an able to do what has been promised. It is an "all or nothing" belief, like jumping on the back of a tightrope walker and letting him carry you across the grand canyon. You trust they can do what they say and act on that belief. As in the tightrope walker you trust they can deliver you across unharmed and act on that by jumping on his back. With regards to Jesus, you believe that all the promise made by God in the Old Testament, and every hope for a future beyond death, "is found as a yes and amen in Jesus." (2 Cor 1:20) On the cross, He was seen as willing to forgive sin by becoming the payment for our sin. In the resurrection, he is seen as able to overcome death. He is willing and able to save! This is the gospel! The gospel story is the evidence given for “believing into” Jesus (John 20:30-31).

Living Commitment

Believing into Jesus does not stop at trusting what he has done on our behalf. Such faith is simple but encompasses all of life. That is it affects our life in the here and now. Trueblood states of this belief into Jesus, “to be committed is to believe in. Commitment, which includes belief but far transcends it, is determination of the total self to act upon conviction.”[iv] He means that we are to embody our commitment to Christ in all aspects of our personal life. We do this "embodying" in our life when what is committed too is truly held as being of ultimate value. This means simple faith is also a living commitment to a real person. A commitment we are to embody in our daily life.

Ultimate Loyalty

Three, their is also a loyalty involved in this simple faith. Jesus is not just Savoir but the Most high King of kings. He is our king, our general, Our leader into whom we are to be loyal. Such is like an oath of service that is made not to the Army or Navy but to a living a resurrected Lord of one’s life. In personal relation into him, we trust all into him and commit our self unconditionally to His cause. This means 1.) We aim to become the kind of person Jesus would have us be. 2.) We do not have to find our purpose in this life, we nee only commit to his cause. He lay the path and we walk it, in the knowledge that he walked it and gives us the power to do the same and the mercy to get up every time we fail. 3.) What he says to do is not optional, or up for review. His teaching is our marching orders and his teachings is not easy. "love your enemy," "Forgive them that hurt you." "Go and tell the world" "oh by the way the world will hate you for my name sake... tell them anyway" (from the DIV, Dawson international version) Much of what Jesus gives us to live by is easy to talk about and praise for its lofty virtue, but hard to place into practice. Real life is muddy and complex. It takes an unwavering loyalty to do what is asked of us. But it is still simple. It is still just a doing your orders, nothing more. Trueblood explains this when writes,

“A Christian is a person who confesses that, amidst the manifold and confusing voices heard in the world, there is one Voice which supremely wins his full assent, uniting all his powers, intellectual and emotional, into a single pattern of self-giving. That Voice is Jesus Christ. A Christian not only believes that he was; he believes in him with all his heart and strength and mind.” [v]


End Notes

--------------------------------------------------------------------
[i] Barnabas Lindars, SSF, JOHN (Sheffield England: Sheffield Academic press 1990) p. 73
[ii] Ibid p. 73
[iii] Ibid p. 73
[iv] Elton Trueblood, The Company of the Committed (Harper Collins publishers, 1961) pg. 22
[v] Ibid pg 23

Meditations on humanity and Christ's human nature

Humanity, the Sad Song of Creation.
Let us turn our attention to humanity for a moment. What are we, good, bad, indifferent? I would say not one of those, but all of those. Man is a contradiction. Pascal describes man this way. “What a chimera, then, is man! what a novelty, what a monster, what a chaos, what a subject of contradiction, what a prodigy! A judge of all things, feeble worm of the earth, depositary of the truth, cloaca of uncertainty and error, the glory and the shame of the universe!”[i] In us all is greatness, yet in us all is wretchedness. We construct orphanages and Auschwitz. We speak of peace but fight wars. We kill carelessly in a selfish fit then become heroes in a moment. We are full of such possibility but drained by our on depravity. Born to us is Mother Teresa and Jeffery Dommer. I think the best portrait one can draw of humanity was done by William Wordsworth. He wrote, “But hearing often times The still, sad music of humanity.”[ii] We are sad music. We are both beautiful and depressing to experience. Dismal yet inspiring to enjoy. This contradiction is not original to us. Before the fall, man was just beauty, harmony, simple, created great. Now, we are a contradiction. Humanity is a paradox of glory and shame and into this paradox Jesus stepped becoming the divine paradox. Jesus became as we did, except His contradiction was that he became the God/man.

As Gregory of Nazianzus, so eloquently states, “That which he has not assumed, he has not healed,”[iii] Christ assumed all of humanity to heal all of humanity. Christ’s humanity is a matter of soteriology, the study of salvation. Christ had to be fully human to fully save us. Migliore states it well, “If God in Christ does not enter into solidarity with the hell of our human condition, we remain without deliverance and without hope.”[iv] He can’t redeem what he has not experienced. This is the theological necessity of Christ humanity. Redemption rests on the absolute fact that God became man to raise man back to his proper place of relationship. The Word became flesh, humanity in all its greatness, the second Adam walked with the shamed of the earth to redeem there shame and unveil there potential for greatness. Part of Christ’s mission was to experience life. He had to become man to the fullest, thus to give us life he lived. He did not become man’s wretchedness but man’s greatness. It was in the violence of the cross he became our wretchedness. The cost of love was in him, being willing to become what he is not so others could become his adopted siblings (Rom 8:16-18, 29-30). His life filled every portion of what it is to be human. He is a standard to measure ourselves by and by this standard we are both condemned and redeemed. His identification with us is our eternal life (John 17:3; Gal 2:20). Jesus was authentic humanity. Human life as it is truly to be lived. He became as humanity was, is and is to be. Charles Finny has a practical definition that highlights the authentic nature of Christ's humanity. “Christ was in all respects a perfect human being, possessing both a human body and human soul, with all the attributes of a perfect man.”[v]

Readings : Heb 2: 8-11, Heb 4:14-16, Heb 5: 7-9

In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to him. 9But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering. Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.

Heb 2: 8-11

Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

Heb 4:14-16

During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him

Heb 5: 7-9

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

End Notes
[i] “Blaise Pascal,” http://www.dividingline.com/private/Philosophy/TopPage/Pascal_Quote.shtml
[ii] 2010 Popular Quotations, edited by Thomas W. Handford, SAGE DIGITAL LIBRARY VOLUMES 1 - 4 (Albany, OR. USA: SAGE Software Version 2.0 © 1996) p. 353
[iii] Gregory of Nazianzus, Epistle 101 in Christology of the Latter fathers, library of Christian classics, vol. 3, ed. Edward R. Hardy (Philadelphia: Westminster press, 1954), p. 218
[iv] Daniel L. Migliore, Faith seeking understanding: an introduction to Christian theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing company, 1991) p. 146
[v] Charles Finny, “Theology lectures” SAGE DIGITAL LIBRARY VOLUMES 1 - 4 (Albany, OR. USA: SAGE Software Version 2.0 © 1996) p. 196

Was John Owen a Charismatic?

Packer says that the Puritans differ from evangelicals today because with them,

" ... communion with God was a great thing, to evangelicals today it is a comparatively small thing. The Puritans were concerned about communion with God in a way that we are not. The measure of our unconcern is the little that we say about it. When Christians meet, they talk to each other about their Christian work and Christian interests, their Christian acquaintances, the state of the churches, and the problems of theology—but rarely of their daily experience of God" [1]

You may not know but I have a simple little definition for what I call a charismatic. No it does not have to do with Rolex, spiritual pride, white pinstriped suits or God forbid, a little “shaba shaba” in the middle of a sermon. I picked it up from a guy across the pond in England, it goes something like this “Those who recognize that the gift of the Spirit is to be received and the gifts of the Spirit are to be exercised.”

Lately I have been reading John Owen’s Communion with The Triune God, while much thesis reading is laborious. This little work has got me toe taping happy. Through it I kept asking myself, was Owen Charismatic? (remember my definition not white suits and money) while I know this is relatively anachronistic to ask if John Owen was a charismatic I can not help but find it very interesting indeed.

Owens like John Piper and Martyn Lloyd-Jones, he makes a clear distinction between the work of the Spirit in saving us and another “often undefined” experiential work that is available to those who desire a dynamic relationship with God. Here is how the introduction to Communion with The Triune God explains this

“. . . when Owen unpacks the work of the Spirit, he makes a distinction between the Spirit being received in terms of “sanctification” and the Spirit’s work of “consolation.” When he refers to sanctification in this context he means the work whereby the Spirit sets us apart, uniting us to Christ and making us alive. This is “a mere passive reception, as a vessel receives water.” This is the movement from being outside the kingdom of God to becoming a child of the King.

When Owen speaks of the Spirit’s work of consolation, he has in mind the comforting activity of the Spirit in the life of the believer. Christians need not be passive in the hope that the Spirit will bring comfort; rather, they should (1) seek his comfort by focusing on the promises of God realized in the Spirit, (2) call out to the Spirit of supplication to bring consolation, and (3) attend “to his motions,” which take us to the Father and Son. In all of this we rightly and actively receive him who freely comes to bring comfort and grace. Again, our union with God in Christ is never in jeopardy, but our sense of fellowship with God does necessitate appropriate human agency and response.

Keeping in mind Owen’s distinction between union and communion, one is better able to make sense of his conclusion: “The Spirit as a sanctifier comes with power, to conquer an unbelieving heart; the Spirit as a comforter comes with sweetness, to be received in a believing heart.” Though the Spirit will never abandon a believer, it should not surprise us that neglecting such receptivity to the Spirit’s movement compromises our sense of intimacy. For Owen, grace must be understood as the ground of this relationship, from first to last, from justification to preservation of the saints, from God’s acceptance of us to his glorifying the saints—grace is the bottom of the entire understanding of the saints’ security and privilege before God. This grace, however, demands rather than denies human response” [2]

So I leave the question Open, as it should remain. It really is kind of a silly question. Anyone that knows me should know I am not for this or that camp, as definitive of the kingdom. I want to be for the church and for the kingdom. I have had some friends over the years confuse my desire for them to take hold of communion with God as call to become like me or affirming of a certain group, that is has never been my intent. I desire to encourage others to be radically, revolutionarily, and risky in their seeking the spirit’s consolation and their responsive and relational awareness to the Spirit. All I ask and encourage is what I have always encouraged a relentless seeking of God, who will make himself known (in many varied ways) to them that seek with all their heart. So they may have all God wants for them in Christ and all of Christ is glorified in them.

I mean, Come On! Anything less is sin whatever you label it.


[1] J. I. Packer, A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life, (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1990), 215.

[2] Owen, John. Communion With the Triune God, Eds. Kelly M. Kapic and Justin Taylor, (Crossway Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 2007) 22-23

The Smell of Lemons

Sometimes life is less than life. Most of the time life is less than living. We all know, life can get the best of us with its semi-transparent joys and resonating pain. The little dayly tragedies chip away at our resolution till we slowly bow to them and live beneath who we could be. Further, In the mix of a day full of simple joys and dizzying busyness, what triumphs we find can be fleeting clouds blown away by the necessities of the day. Things can get gray. Life becomes remiss of beauty. Living becomes a discipline of distraction. Each day can become a half life of dreams unrealized. Under such oppression, existing is the best many can do when darkness punches you in the face and dares you to get up! In those moments, less feeling souls may say, "When life gives you lemons go make lemonade." Such clichés are both trite and uncaring, yet I can’t help but smell the fain odor of reality.

Sometimes a song is more than a song. It can be an analogy of life itself. A song like human moments are measured out and ordered to reveal a purposeful harmony that was there all along, Hidden between the moments, in the breathless spaces between words. And in our hearing like in our living, a poetic 'Good' is uncovered; in lyric and harmony this 'good' that we feel in our bones is disclosed. A good that is felt by human hearts and marked by divine work. A good that is woven through pain and redeemed in joy by divine hands. Hands that still show the scars and splinters of pain personally realized. Jesus Hands that stream healing and open to reveal a good that withholds more pain than we know. Hands that sovereignly hold back a flood of suffering that could drown us if not for His power. Yet in our pain this secret escape, this "it could be worse if not for the grace of God" is often forgotten. And even in our forgetfulness the hands still heal, the hands still hold, the hands still write the music life itself sets its rhythms too. And in little ways, a Song can show this 'Good' even, in our pain, even if it hurts.

Sometimes a song is more than a song. It is a string on your finger, a reminder of some person. You smile with mixed glee at the fleeting memory of who they are to you. What often goes “unknotted” is how they in little ways, made you. How events may have impacted you but they changed you. When I here the song below my sister, Jill comes to mind. Jill was a victim of domestic violence. Hurt by one that clammed to love, she rose from the ash, healed from the bruises, and walked away; retaining her dignity and protecting the life of her baby girl. Jill didn’t just make lemonade. She bought stock in Kool Ade. Today she is on the offensive as a legal advocate for battered women; fighting relentlessly to insure women receive the dignity afforded them as the crowning art of God's creative act. She stands up for those whom Jesus called the 'least of these', resisting drunken rednecks, death threats, and shotguns in her face, even governmental lobbyist. Vowing to protect and pull women and children from abusive life threatening situations. She taught me how a cliché could resonate with relentless truth when God is your backbone and justice your shield. I love my sisters, I love Jill and every time I hug her I smell lemons.

Sometimes life is less than life.

Sometimes a song is more than a song.

Sometimes you smell lemons.

Economics and the Christain ethic

The Preacher and Economics
Realistic thinking about the human condition will result in sound economic policy. Simply put, this is to explain why capitalism succeeds where socialism fails. From a theological perspective, I understand the reasons for the difference between the two systems. While work is a creation ordinance under which men may flourish, since the Fall men create goods and services largely out of self-interest. When any government takes away incentives for achievement and success, both individuals and society suffer. Without the vigorous creation of wealth, both governments and charities become severely hampered in their efforts to help the poor. Economics, therefore, is no mere trifle to the preacher. Rather, it must be viewed as a discipline, which need to recognize man’s true nature revealed in the Bible.

But, Does the Bible give us any indication of the way we should order our economic affairs? Whilst the gospel itself is essentially concerned with personal salvation and personal ethics, and other parts of the New Testament give guidelines for the life and ethic of the church, the Old Testament has a wealth of teaching that embodies principles of social ethics of everlasting value. Careful examination of this can point to the sort of economic systems that seem most in accord with the will of God. Yet it is important to note that only guiding principles can be found and no full theory short of God himself can be found.

First, there is the guidance from the story of the Creation and Fall. We are told that man was made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27) and given dominion over the resources of the earth (Gen. 1:28-29). Like God, then, we are creative beings, with a natural desire and duty to work, and so we need economic and political systems which will give us the freedom to give expression to this creativity. As a result of the Fall, however, God made work part of His curse on man: it is no longer simply a creative joy, but a struggle to meet our needs in the face of scarcity (Gen. 3:17-19). The central issue of economics—the study of the production and distribution of scarce resources—is a consequence of the Fall. We may struggle to overcome scarcity, but economic systems which promise that by changing certain structures we may achieve some sort of utopian paradise on earth (as does Marxism) are doomed to failure.

Second, there is the guidance to be drawn from the instructions God gave the nation of Israel for the ordering of their society as laid down in the Mosaic law. From this a complex pattern emerges which, in our terms, fits neither a fully socialist nor a fully capitalist model. God clearly sanctioned private ownership of property to support family units. But in order that each family should have a permanent stake in economic life, a limit was put on any downward spiral into poverty. Every fifty years (the Jubilee) all slaves were supposed to be freed, all debts cancelled, and all land returned to original owners. In addition the Israelites had to pay tithes on their output (similar to a fairly low rate of proportional taxation) and to leave harvest gleanings so as to support the poor. The relief of poverty, not pursuit of economic equality, seemed to be the guiding principle.

Third, there is the guidance offered by prophets like Jeremiah, Malachi, and Amos who thundered against cheating of all kinds, exploitation, and forced labor. In our own day, most injustices of these types stem from monopoly power (both of capital or labor), lack of property rights, inadequate or corrupt legal systems, and heavy-handed governments. We must understand that any system must have checks and balances and that ultimately it is up to the individual that sees injustice to speak out and do something. John Stout writes about the nature story of the rich man and Lazarus. Making the point rather forcefully that simple compaction is the beginning of being a force for good.

We are all tempted to use the enormous complexity of international economics as an excuse to do nothing. Yet this was the sin of Dives. There is no suggestion that Dives was responsible for the poverty of Lazarus either by robbing or by exploiting him. The reason for Dives’ guilt is that he ignored the beggar at his gate and did precisely nothing to relieve his destitution. He acquiesced in a situation of gross economic inequality, which had rendered Lazarus less than fully human and which he could have relieved. The pariah dogs that licked Lazarus’ sores showed more compassion than Dives did. Dives went to hell because of his indifference (1)

If people could live from such a simple principle daily life would be richer and a society could properly regulate the institutional structures that issue in and thought it. It is also called the maintenance of a social conscience.

One, the guidance from the story of the Creation and Fall. Creation order and disorder doctrines frame for ethical understanding and worldview of a Christian. Two, guiding principles taken form the life of Israel gives us some ethical dynamics of economics. Three, the maintenance of the American conscience is through compassion and the companionate acts. This is a means of rising social awareness of biblical oppression and injustices. When a government has many laws its people suffer from a little conscience.

For these reasons I believe liberal democracies with diffused ownership of capital, a strong rule of law, and welfare provision for the poor are more in accord with God-given principles than other systems we see around the globe today. This does not mean that any system is perfect, nor does it absolve God’s people from speaking out against particular cases of greed, injustice, or oppression.

Further reflections on the New Testament churches and the poor

Jesus reminds us in the New Testament that the church will always have the poor with us. We will always be called to the least of these. He even clamed that his manifest presence would be with them in a special way. This was the way of the early church. Read the words of Justine maryter as she speaks caring for the poor as part of the weekly worship.

And we afterwards continually remind each other of [our common faith]. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration (2)

Aristides of Athens adds to this description in his apologetic addressed to the Roman emperor Hadrian (2nd century). The purpose of Aristides’s treatise was to defend the Christian faith against false accusations. In the letter, He argues that the Christian moral code surpasses the highest ethical ideals of the great philosophers, especially as manifested by the Church’s concern for the poor and socially vulnerable.

They [Christians] help those who offend them, making friends of them; do good to their enemies. They don’t adore idols; they are kind, good, modest, sincere, they love one another; don’t despise widows; protect the orphans; those who have much give without grumbling, to those in need. When they meet strangers, they invite them to their homes with joy, for they recognize them as true brothers, not natural but spiritual.

When a poor man dies, if they become aware, they contribute according to their means for his funeral; if they come to know that some people are persecuted or sent to prison or condemned for the sake of Christ’s name, they put their alms together and send them to those in need. If they can do it, they try to obtain their release. When a slave or a beggar is in need of help, they fast two or three days, and give him the food they had prepared for themselves, because they think that he too should be joyful, as he has been called to be joyful like themselves (3)

Health care can be seen as a part of the common good. Redistribution of wealth (it is an injustice to fight an injustice- mom told me two wrong don’t make it right) is Socialism, no matter word you put before it. Further, it will back fire. Free money breeds Idleness and will lead to people misusing the system. So I still Hold that socialism as to mean care for the poor is the work and social ethic of the church.

Money the green (insert “monster of your choice” here) of America
The proper use and role of money must be understood. It has no statues, holds no power, and is never more important that human life. To answer this we will role back time and use some reasons given us by Clement of Alexandria. Clement was well read layman and phenomenal writer, Clement not only engaged in philosophical discussions but also spent much of his energies on practical instruction for Christians. (I write that like the two could possibly be separated) In Who Is the Rich Man that Shall Be Saved? Clement explains that poverty is not always the blessing that some in the early Church considered it to be. Clement argues that it is far better not to be anxious about money and to be able to give to others. In this clarification Jesus clam that the poor will always be with the church is intelaganble. The church need not be poor but need be generous and trusting God in the use of money.

For if no one had anything, what room would be left among men for giving? . . . How could one give food to the hungry, and drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, and shelter the houseless . . (4)

Clement at this point gives a proper role in the social order of life. Money is wares the garments of a slave. So it can be said, Money is a servant to be used for the benefit of others. Clement continues:

Riches, then, which benefit also our neighbours, are not to be thrown away . . . Such an instrument is wealth. Are you able to make a right use of it? It is subservient to righteousness. Does one make a wrong use of it? It is, on the other hand, a minister of wrong. For its nature is to be subservient, not to rule. That then which of itself has neither good nor evil, being blameless, ought not to be blamed; but that which has the power of using it well and ill, by reason of its possessing voluntary choice . . . So let no man destroy wealth, rather than the passions of the soul, which are incompatible with the better use of wealth. (5)

Character, love, and money, in the church
Erasmus in his book: “The Education of a Christian Prince.” He made the point that Honor must be given on the bases of a man’s character not his wallet. A lesson we have lost in our modern times (6). Further George Whitfield; the great evangelist and Christian activist (many did not know this) spoke of the necessity of love. For the Christian Love must rule for wealth is a test of character, just as poverty is a test of character.

Nothing is more valuable and commendable, and yet, not one duty is less practiced, than that of charity. We often pretend concern and pity for the misery and distress of our fellow-creatures, but yet we seldom commiserate their condition so much as to relieve them according to our abilities; but unless we assist them with what they may stand in need of, for the body, as well as for the soul, all our wishes are no more than words of no value . . .

[I]f there is true love, there will be charity; there will be an endeavor to assist, help, and relieve according to that ability wherewith God has blessed us . . .
O that the rich would consider how praise-worthy this duty is, in helping their fellow-creatures! . . . but alas, our great men had much rather spend their money in a playhouse, at a ball, an assembly, or a masquerade, than relieve a poor distressed servant of Jesus Christ. They had rather spend their estates on their hawks and hounds, on their whores, and earthly, sensual, devilish pleasures, than comfort, nourish, or relieve one of their distressed fellow-creatures . . . neither will you be judged according to the largeness of your estate, but according to the use you have made of it . . .
Let me beseech you to consider, which will stand you best at the day of judgment, so much money expended at a horse-race, or a cockpit, at a play or masquerade, or so much given for the relief of your fellow-creatures, and for the distressed members of Jesus Christ . (7)

He also speaks to the poor and exhorted them. .

I would exhort you who are poor, to be charitable to one another.
Though you may not have money, or the things of this life, to bestow upon one another; yet you may assist them, by comforting, and advising them not to be discouraged though they are low in the world; or in sickness you may help them according as you have time or ability: do not be unkind to one another: do not grieve, or vex, or be angry with each other; for this is giving the world an advantage over you.

And if God stirs up any to relieve you, do not make an ill use of what his providence, by the hands of some Christian, hath bestowed upon you: be always humble and wait on God; do not murmur or repine, if you see any relieved and you are not; still wait on the Lord, and help one another, according to your abilities, from time to time.(8)

In the end The church is to be a love driven socialist movement rooted in a doctrines of God, the church and last things. The poor we will always have with us is more real that cartons and more a problem than most want to recognize. .

Notes
(1) John Stott, “Economic Equality Among Nations: A Christian Concern?” Christianity Today, May 2 1980, 35.

(2) Justin Martyr, “The First Apology of Justin,” Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, eds. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Grand Rapids, MI: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1985), 185-186.

(3) Aristides, The New Encyclopedia of Christian Martyrs, compiled Mark Waters (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2001), 70-71.

(4)Clement of Alexandria, “Who Is the Rich Man that Shall Be Saved?” in Ante-Nicene Fathers: Fathers of the Second Century, vol. 2 (New York: Charles and Scribner’s Sons, 1899) 594-595.

(5)Clement of Alexandria, “Who Is the Rich Man that Shall Be Saved?” in Ante-Nicene Fathers: Fathers of the Second Century, vol. 2 (New York: Charles and Scribner’s Sons, 1899) 595.

(6) Erasmus, “The Education of a Christian Prince,” in The Erasmus Reader, ed. Erika Rummel (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990), 263-264

(7) George Whitefield, “The Great Duty of Charity Recommended,” in The Works of the Reverend George Whitefield, http://www.reformed.org/documents/Whitefield/WITF_047.html (accessed October, 28 2008).

(8) Ibid.

Matt Chandler on human attraction

God bless the Truth.

My October Man Crush

..... is ..... Matt Chadler.

In this first one I got a feel for this guys heart. We sould all understand life from this perspective. Saddly my time in seminary did little than steal such a vision of life. hearing men like him awakens something in me, I hope it does the same for you.

Matt on living to fill eternity

I like this point and again living in light of eternity is the foundwork of life well lived. Also T-willy this on is for you. (Go Dogs)

Matt chadler with some wise words for those in ministry

Capitalism, Socailism, and other frames of reality?

Is capitalism dead?

The New York Times[1], writes of a trader holding a sign that said, “Capitalism is Dead.” You know things are not nearly kosher when you see someone on Wal-street holding a sign like that! Overstatement, sure, but what are we mere morals to think of this entire economic crisis. Even if you have an economics degree it is hard to understand comprehensively, but why. Simply put it is because economics is a comprehensive subject, thus it has worldview implications.

Economics as worldview
One of the main problems is how economics is taught in college. The economic philosophy of the particular facility, no matter Capitalist or Socialist, is taught like one teaches worldview. With pervasive and overarching principles, dealing with themes like what is humanity, values, ect. Thus economic “worldview” education can’t help but govern a life, unlike religious ideas that are abstract and must be integrated into the soul thought existential action, economic ideas are rooted in immediate reality. Life and character are immediately affected; because of the way it affects life. It is a style of teaching that trains a person in a “way the world works” or “works best.” We like to believe in economics because it gives us a sense of control over the universe no mater the theory. For example, In capitalism, we can render ourselves as self-man men and women. We seek control in believing in economics.

We Americans, need departments of economics to exist because if they exist, then we assume that we know something like an economic realm must exist that is subject to its own 'laws.' Moreover, in order for economics to be a prediction science, we increasingly live as well as think about our lives as if we are utilitarian calculators. To live in any other way threatens to make rational choice methodologies, so important to the explanatory power of contemporary economics, not work. We become interests seeking units of desire in order to sustain the prediction power of economics. Not so to think of ourselves would render our trust in those experts we call economist unintelligible[2]

As a Christian, I already have a worldview that says only theocracy, ultimately and eternally will work as the economic frame for a society. Yet such a frame is not to be until the king comes to clam His bride and establish a true kingdom. Thus all other human attempts operate from a scale of imperfection, no matter how logically tight or historically consistent it is in theory. My rights as a free man has moral validity and vitality in Him (not sure yet about the structure of this) yet equality true, my rights end in his Lordship. Fundamentally, My personal lust for power ended at the cross. I am dead to self-seeking after greed to gain power over my life and others. I am dead to self-seeking after political power thought manipulation and control of others.

My worldview tells me people are bad in their hearts unlike socialism. My worldview tells me God is in control and institutions can’t be allowed to be self-regulating for they are given to structures of injustice. Where as people have a conscience, post-whatever society dose not. The herd is void of a conscience. In short, I want to remind everyone, when we talk of which system is better or more Christian, we must not loose our worldview in the talk. From the Christian worldview – can be seduced by economic theory like it can be by nationalism.

The Fall
All of life has been affected by the one turning point in history: the fall. So to talk about one part of society being bad and another being pure is wrong headed. All parts are saturated an men will use any means to get there ends. The proper used of all neutral elements like technology is determine by the ends towards which we direct them.

Capitalism and socialism, are twisted; polluted, and diluted by the fall and thus both are week. The Great weakness of Capitalism is it produces and idolatry of greed and if left unchecked social structures can exist without a since of social justice (read Amose). Things go bad when the view of the good life in capitalism looses aspects of virtue, character, and religious pity. One Philosophy notes that America has become a culture that forms in people a very “consumer” character.

They are educated or rather miseducated to believe that they should aim and hope for not what they deserve but what ever they may happen to want. They are in the vast majority of cases to regard themselves primarily as consumers whose practical and productive activities are no more than a means to consumption. What constitutes success in life becomes a matter of acquisition of the consumer good, and thereby that acquisitiveness which is so often a character trait necessary for success in capital accumulation is further sanctioned. Unsurprisingly, pleonexia, the drive to have more and more, becomes treated as a central virtue. The Christian theologians in the middle Ages had learned from Aristotle that pleonexia is the vice that is counterpart to the virtue of justice. And they had understood, as later theologians failed to do, the close connection between the developing of capitalism and the sin of usury. So it's not, after all just general human sinfulness that generates particular individual actions of injustice over and above the institutional injustice of capitalism itself. Capitalism also provides systematic incentives to develop a type of character that has propensity to injustice.[3]

That is when capitalism is unrestrained and lacking a conscious. So both moral restraint and social boundaries are needed. Since the British economist John Maynard Keynes rescued the British economy “from the quicksand of the 1930s.” Usually, the markets correct themselves, but every once in a while “unorthodox government intervention” is required to keep the engine running. This is the way capitalism has worked in practice. [4]

Socialism is weak in that it does not work. It is a bad structure, in and of itself. History bears this out, in considerable measure. In the year 1620, an extraordinary charter was written called the “Mayflower Compact.” William Bradford and other writers formulated the original contract with over sight from their sponsors in London. In it they called for everything as producers to give into a common storehouse (YES, a very bad reading of ACT). Yes, The pilgrims who settled in New Plymouth, Virgina, where trying to be granola eating, black hat wearing, witch burning, biblical (with a questions mark) socialist!

This attempt to practice socialism had very poor results and Bradford wrote in his Journal why it failed, he said, “For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense ... that was thought injustice.”

OK so the system is unjust in itself. Further, its greatest weakness is in the centralizing of power. (Hello!! read Animal farm, and think metaphor of USSR) The lust for power will limit human freedom. Socialism is open to it. The problem with socialism is it becomes the center pushing out all true centers, like religious and communal life.

This inversion of the structure of the State which, instead of being built up from below, is organized from above, is the one great iniquity of our time, the iniquity which overshadows all others, and generates them of itself. The order of creation is turned upside down; what should be last is first, the expedient, the subsidiary, has become the main thing. The State, which should be only the bark on the life of the community, has become the tree itself. [5]

Yet, no matter the system a Christian can be a Christian. A Christian can exist in and be ethical in an imperfect system, Brunner explains.

no man, as a member of an institution is only a member of an institution, but always and only a person, there is room for love even in the most impersonal of institutions, not in the actual activity of the institution itself, but “between the lines. [6]

The question is which one promotes the common good and allows for the clearest path towards the good life and I’m a sure there are a few more questions that I can’t think of. But that how I see it.


End note

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/opinion/01wed4.html?ref=opinion

[2] Stanley Hauerwas, sanctify them in the truth, (Abingdon press, Nashville1998), 233

[3] Alastair macIntyre, Marxism and Christianity 2nd ed (London: Duckworth, 1995), 13-14

[4] Satyendra Nayak, The Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/01/savior-of-capitalism/

[5] Emil Brunner, Justice and the social order (Lutterworth Press 1945) 124-125 p.

[6] Emil Brunner Justice and the social order (Lutterworth Press 1945) 117 p.

The Good the Bad and the Ugly on the web!

You like music? Well then hear are three musical NET gens that can be summed up as the good the bad and the ugly!! I don't need to tell you witch one is which do I?

Fix Your Face

See more funny videos and funny pictures at CollegeHumor.

Going to lay down by Burden - Down by the waters side..

"Going to lay down by Burden - Down by the river side.." this little hymn that most relate to baptisms was first written as a African spiritual of Hope. It was sung by those that dropping the burden of slavery and swimming across the great river to freedom in northern border states. The Imagery remains rich when this understanding is added to the picture of baptism. The free slaves remembered there experience of swimming for freedom and paralleled that experience to the experience of baptism. The song was born on the tongues of men an woman that knew the wet thirst for freedom and the journy thought the water to get there. Further, Paul in Romans uses Baptism as a metaphor for the freedom we have in our salvation. we are new creations free - and holy in Christ. It is seen in Romans 6:3-5

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.

As we go under with him we will be raised with him. Both certainty and hope point to the freedom we have in Christ. Baptism is a description that a burden has been laid down by the river side. The slavery of sin, the past, unforgivness, hopplessness are all no more and we now live as free men and woman. I love how my church does baptisms, it is down by the river side, if you will . Below is a video of one little freedom child making her swim for freedom. SO hum it if you know it....

"Going to lay down my Burden - Down by the river side.."

Our justification from sins takes place at the point of saving faith, not at the point of water baptism, which usually occurs later. But if a person is already justified and has sins forgiven eternally at the point of saving faith, then baptism is not necessary for forgiveness of sins nor for the bestowal of new spiritual life. Baptism, then, is not necessary for salvation. But it is necessary if we are to be obedient to Christ, for he commanded baptism for all who believe in him.

WAYNE A. GRUDEM, Bible Doctrine

Baptism is rich in meaning. It suggests cleansing. When you are a disciple, you understand that you are cleansed by Christ. You understand that Christ died in your place on the cross, paying for your sins, fully forgiving you for all your wrongs. You are cleansed from guilt, and you are becoming a cleaner, healthier, more whole person.

BRIAN D. MCLAREN, More Ready Than You Realize

The KING'S glory and the glory King saw.

Last night, I took a trip to 1968. No I was not tripping on acid. I used modern technology to hear the last speech that Martin Luther King did before he died. It is one of my favorites. The whole speech can be found here. As I heard him talk I was reminded of the deep need for what he called dangerous unselfishness. King puts it this way.

Let us develop a kind of dangerous unselfishness. One day a man came to Jesus, and he wanted to raise some questions about some vital matters of life. At points he wanted to trick Jesus, and show him that he knew a little more than Jesus knew and throw him off base....

Now that question could have easily ended up in a philosophical and theological debate. But Jesus immediately pulled that question from mid-air, and placed it on a dangerous curve between Jerusalem and Jericho. And he talked about a certain man, who fell among thieves. You remember that a Levite and a priest passed by on the other side. They didn't stop to help him. And finally a man of another race came by. He got down from his beast, decided not to be compassionate by proxy. But he got down with him, administered first aid, and helped the man in need. Jesus ended up saying, this was the good man, this was the great man, because he had the capacity to project the "I" into the "thou," and to be concerned about his brother.

Now you know, we use our imagination a great deal to try to determine why the priest and the Levite didn't stop. At times we say they were busy going to a church meeting, an ecclesiastical gathering, and they had to get on down to Jerusalem so they wouldn't be late for their meeting. At other times we would speculate that there was a religious law that "One who was engaged in religious ceremonials was not to touch a human body twenty-four hours before the ceremony." And every now and then we begin to wonder whether maybe they were not going down to Jerusalem -- or down to Jericho, rather to organize a "Jericho Road Improvement Association." That's a possibility. Maybe they felt that it was better to deal with the problem from the causal root, rather than to get bogged down with an individual effect.

But I'm going to tell you what my imagination tells me. It's possible that those men were afraid. You see, the Jericho road is a dangerous road. I remember when Mrs. King and I were first in Jerusalem. We rented a car and drove from Jerusalem down to Jericho. And as soon as we got on that road, I said to my wife, "I can see why Jesus used this as the setting for his parable." It's a winding, meandering road. It's really conducive for ambushing. You start out in Jerusalem, which is about 1200 miles -- or rather 1200 feet above sea level. And by the time you get down to Jericho, fifteen or twenty minutes later, you're about 2200 feet below sea level. That's a dangerous road. In the days of Jesus it came to be known as the "Bloody Pass." And you know, it's possible that the priest and the Levite looked over that man on the ground and wondered if the robbers were still around. Or it's possible that they felt that the man on the ground was merely faking. And he was acting like he had been robbed and hurt, in order to seize them over there, lure them there for quick and easy seizure. And so the first question that the priest asked -- the first question that the Levite asked was, "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?" But then the Good Samaritan came by. And he reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?"

Reflections on the virtue of Neighbor love.

Three Amen’s of the soul rise to my mind from his words. King is right when it comes to our greatest problem and how our social problems stem from it. He is also right on the questions that make our problems personal. There is a third Amen but it comes from the example of King’s life.

No little problem
King was right when he points out the deepest problem in man. Our hearts a selfishly bent in on themselves. The selfishness that beckons us to care much for ourselves is at the root of modern indifference to current problems. This self-love that moves us all, from time to time to, “pass on by” is no little problem. It is no little problem for the one bleeding in the ditch and no little problem for the Lover of our soul. For the one in need experiences both the pain of practical needs unmet, and the cold lonely air of indifference, And for the One High and lifted up, the One who came in a manger, our selfishness led him to experience the pain of three nails and 3 hours. Our twisted nature has never been a little problem.

The Questions that bids us stay!
King is also right when he showed how the soul is set to account for it self in dialoged with Jesus' words. He was right because Jesus was right and Jesus' point is clear. The questions we ask ourselves in moments of danger show the content of our character. From Jesus’ teaching, King gives his own call to response in his reprise:

"That's the question before you tonight.
Not, "If I stop to help ….. what will happen to my job.
Not, "If I stop to help …… what will happen to all of the hours that I usually spend in my office every day and every week as a pastor?"
The question is not, "If I stop to help this man in need, what will happen to me?"
The question is, "If I do not stop to help ….., what will happen to them?" That's the question."

King clams that the question is important for his hears and I would add still important for us today. Such "neighbor love" has been trivialized for an impotent version of love void of power. Neighbor love that bids us stay is not a love common in today’s world. As the parable shows such love has an element of sacrifice. A giving in spit of the danger. A loving the other with no regard for your own protection. It is a care for the good of one's neighbor grounded in the glory of God. Only such a vision of God and others can so consume us to the point we are self-forgetful. But who loves like that? I have to say not many, last century was called the age of the self and rightly so. The post modern age will not be much different. I fear activists will lack the "Neighbor love" of King. We need to let King's questions question us and we need to be honest with the depths of our selfishness.

The fire that consumes.
This selfishness we are all disposed to is a mighty force and never easily overcome. It is a fire that can only be extinguished by an even mightier flame. BUT what is the Nature of such a flame? Only a consuming fire can do such a work. That is why the scriptures say, God is a consuming fire. – For only God can do such a work, Only God can make such a man stay when danger bids him “GO!” This is what the scriptures tell us, “God is a consuming fire” God is the fire and God is the flame. It is only a God’s size flame that can put out the fires of selfishness. We would do well to remember, the fire of God’s jealous love abiding in the heart of his children can move us past self protection and into dangerous unselfishness even on the road to Jericho.

Such a fire, which is god himself, burns for the glory of God. In the heart of man only a passion for the glory of God can move him to stop and moves him to stand. Only Love can make a man do crazy things. And Only Ultimate love can move a man to stay when his head says "Go!" Whatever you call it “moral courage” as the ethicist do. Or “dangerous unselfishness” as the activists do. Or even “A passion for God’s glory!” as the theologians do. What matters is that you do something with it. You stop when you feel like going. You die when you selfishness nature wants to live. It is stopping when you want to Go on by and staying when your fears say run that makes this inner flame more than mere sentiment - action makes it passion!

Seeing by the fire
Seeing by the glory of god is mostly lost today. It is good to remind, this fire is nothing like most fires today. Today people burn but it is all heat and no light. People are passionate today but they burn with a strange fire that demands God to do there biding. They seem to be people of passion but little illumination. People that talk of God's glory but seek there own. People that are marked more by loving the things of God than God himself - such people "pass on by" and dine with the Levite and the Pharisee.

A true passion for God's glory will shift more than your theological propositions. It will change your perception. God's true fire gives light as well as heat. Such a flame gives light to the eyes of the heart and illuminates every human face. In such a light man resembles the one who made him. In this light humanity is seen with divine dignity. By this flame, we see reflected in every human face the image of GOD. So we can understand that this fire's light reveals that humanity is my neighbor, worthy of my care buy virtue of the image they bear. The glory of God reaches to us through our neighbors by the image they all bear. Every pain we see, ever need we can meet but don't is God's glory appearing diminished by our indifference. To love your neighbor is to glorify God in this broken world.


A life as a “holey” “wholly” “holy” burning man
Paul was good at this. He was full of holes and issues but he worked on them. He was wholly given to the will of God. Lastly he was holy devoted to God. This is what it means to burn, to live "well done". He lived as a dead man consumed by the fire of God. It takes Dangerous unselfishness to live as a dead man. We to can be like Paul, one that is breathing but already “crucified with Christ” – a Follower that “no longer lives” but lives on for “Christ lives in” us. We can live as dead men that exhibit life in real time and hope for the days ahead. I love the end of King's speech – on the video - you can see his eye glisten with tears and his emotion is true and rich when he speaks of the death threats on his life. He was a marked man and he knew it. But he had dangerous unselfishness! There where people in need and he was not about to "go on by" but in his weak and incomplete humanity he was completed by love, compelled to stop in Memphis and help. His ending act as a clarinet call for all that seek to be God glorifying activist, ethicists, theologians, insert the occupation of your choice. We all need to echo the heart of king when he stated.

Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now, because I've been to the mountaintop.
And I don't mind.
Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!
And so I'm happy, tonight.
I'm not worried about anything.
I'm not fearing any man!
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!!

The next morning King was killed by a gunman as he exited his motel room.

What King saw.
King was not an example of chastised faultless virtue, yet he revealed to the world a deep and abiding truth. King could be filled with a dangerous unselfishness because His eyes had seen the glory and that passion consumed any competing fire and warmed any chilling fears that would cry "Go on by" when the moment cried "stay." What did king see that gave him the grace and strength? King saw the KING! May we all look up and be graced with such a hope. May we say with king “mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord” and may that drive our hearts to unselfish giving of ourselves. Even if giving to the flame is a bullet to the head or not hating the debauchery and indifference of post-modern culture. We can see the glory of the KING. In the face of it all, we can have the capacity to care, for in it all, we see His glory in the mass of humanity before us. We can love reckless and live dangerous unselfishness for God's glory is rising, His glory is shining, His Glory is enthroned to be the supreme passion for all things!

Turn your eyes to the KING and your ears to King, can you hear the echoes?

“Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!!”