False Messages I: What He Really Wants
41 minutes ago
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Monday, October 26, 2009
Why Thesis 1, of the 95 Theses, is the Most Profound
The most profound statement ever made outside of Scripture has to be found in the first of the 95 Theses stated by Martin Luther.
Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite (Repent Ye), willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.
This first thesis is truly deeper than any thought recorded and has the most impact for any believer for the following reasons:
1. Humility
When one is a repentant man, one has to realize that he is continually wrong. This continual understanding of wrongness, drives the man to humility. Paul said he was the chief of sinners and least of the apostles, showing the lead in how we should understand our sin as it relates to others. We are not above others, but we should see as our least among our brethren. Thesis 1, is truly amazing, because it drives us to humility.
2. Our Problem
When one is constantly in need of repentance, it shows that we are constantly in torment over our sinful state, showing our lack in ourselves. Repentance not only gives one humility, but it shows the utter lack of good within themselves. When one is continually being shown their sin, it shows the truth in God's word that says that "none are good, no not one" and "all our good deeds are like filthy rags." When one lives a life of repentance, it is a life that continually sees their lack, not their fullness in themselves.
3. Our Solution
Notice who says, "Poenitentiam agite." Is it not our Christ? When one lives a life of repentance, they are driven to humility, see their lack of righteousness, but are also driven to understand their need for a Saviour. When one repents, they don't merely turn from sin, but they turn to their Saviour. A life of repentance, is a life that is full, not because of their own goodness, but in the goodness of the One they turn to. A life of repentance is a thankful life that is lived out because of the gift and love of the Saviour to save them from utter despair of realization of a life lived out wickedly.
and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory,
1 Peter 1:8
“But now I come to You; and these things I speak in the world so that they may have My joy made full in themselves.
John 17:13
For these three succinct reasons, which many books could and have been written on, I believe that the words of Luther are most profound and ones that came only after a man was caught up in self-righteousness found that,
For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “But the righteous man shall live by faith.”
Romans 1:17
This man, realized in himself was a torn up worm who needed to continually repent to see his Christ more clearly. For that, I thank him, but to God alone I give glory.
Read More......
Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite (Repent Ye), willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.
This first thesis is truly deeper than any thought recorded and has the most impact for any believer for the following reasons:
1. Humility
When one is a repentant man, one has to realize that he is continually wrong. This continual understanding of wrongness, drives the man to humility. Paul said he was the chief of sinners and least of the apostles, showing the lead in how we should understand our sin as it relates to others. We are not above others, but we should see as our least among our brethren. Thesis 1, is truly amazing, because it drives us to humility.
2. Our Problem
When one is constantly in need of repentance, it shows that we are constantly in torment over our sinful state, showing our lack in ourselves. Repentance not only gives one humility, but it shows the utter lack of good within themselves. When one is continually being shown their sin, it shows the truth in God's word that says that "none are good, no not one" and "all our good deeds are like filthy rags." When one lives a life of repentance, it is a life that continually sees their lack, not their fullness in themselves.
3. Our Solution
Notice who says, "Poenitentiam agite." Is it not our Christ? When one lives a life of repentance, they are driven to humility, see their lack of righteousness, but are also driven to understand their need for a Saviour. When one repents, they don't merely turn from sin, but they turn to their Saviour. A life of repentance, is a life that is full, not because of their own goodness, but in the goodness of the One they turn to. A life of repentance is a thankful life that is lived out because of the gift and love of the Saviour to save them from utter despair of realization of a life lived out wickedly.
and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory,
1 Peter 1:8
“But now I come to You; and these things I speak in the world so that they may have My joy made full in themselves.
John 17:13
For these three succinct reasons, which many books could and have been written on, I believe that the words of Luther are most profound and ones that came only after a man was caught up in self-righteousness found that,
For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “But the righteous man shall live by faith.”
Romans 1:17
This man, realized in himself was a torn up worm who needed to continually repent to see his Christ more clearly. For that, I thank him, but to God alone I give glory.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Obedience or Obligation? Gospel vs. Religion
Recently I have received some comments from an anonymous person that is probably either an atheist or agnostic. Either way, they do not understand how I can say that I believe that ones inside influence or heart of man matter when dealing with the outward works of man. Seemingly, they find it hard to believe that this "trickery of the mind" really matters or is helpful and really doesn't find it much different than religion.
He actually went as far as to say that because I believe in the grace of the cross that must mean that my God will be happy if I remain in "grace" without real changes in my behavior. Which is interesting because Paul received the same questions when he preached on grace:
What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?
May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?
Romans 6:1-2
Now, I know that when speaking to a non-believer in Christ and the authority of the Bible their will be a bit of an unwinnable war between us. So, what I am not trying to do is win them to my side, but explain why I believe that it truly is a big deal to understand a life lived out because of grace instead of a life lived out to receive grace. One is the gospel and the other is historical and contemporary religion. There is a vast difference and it is shown quite clearly in the Scriptures.
Christ tells us this:
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
“Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
“For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
Matthew 11:28-30
“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.
John 14:15
For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.
1 John 5:3
These statements are a big deal. Ones that I found very hard to understand while dealing with being a religious person hoping that my good works would at some point catch the attention of my Creator.
The real understanding of the cross and it's abundance is not trickery or some sort of mind games. It is real and one that is derived from the Spirit opening up, not only the mind, but the affections of the heart to the One who died for me. The outcome of this affection comes true obedience to the Christ, not some sort of obligation to pay him back in some sort of quasi payment plan.
We actually see this happen in real life as well which prove that this obedience out of gratitude and love is not mere mind games and trickery, but real obedience that isn't burdensome.
Why is it that God sets up pictures for us through our lives that depict what a real relationship with him is like? Think of these. Christians are called the bride of Christ, pointing to marriage and God is also called our Father, pointing to the structure of family.
When thinking of marriage and family, true obedience coming out of love is always distinguished from a mere obligation to be paid because one is a spouse or a child.
When thinking of my marriage, I do those things that please my wife because I love her. I do these things out of gratitude for her love for me and our close relationship through the knitting of souls in marriage. I will at times do the dishes, buy her flowers, take her out, clean up after myself, make the bed, etc. not because this is an obligation in marriage, but because I love her. I want to please her, I want to make her happy and do those things which bring her pleasure. These things are not burdensome, but are done because of my deep rooted love for my wife. I have asked my wife, "If I cheated on you, would you divorce me?" She responded, "although it would be hard, I would do all I could to stay married and honor our marriage and God." Now, do I go off cheating on her to take advantage of the situation? Or, do I understand how much I love her and how much she loves me and honor her?
The same is with Christ. I don't do good things because if I don't he won't love me. I do the things of Christ because of the great love he displayed for my sake on the cross and the resurrection. This is not trickery of the mind, but a correct understanding of the gospel. If it was mere trickery, then what is the difference between a husband who does things for his wife's pleasure out of love and the one who does those things so the wife won't divorce him and take half of his money?
The same can be seen within the structure of the family. As a parent, I don't want mere obedience, no parent truly does. Now, is it nice when our kids are obedient instead of unruly? Yes, but does this prove that they love us? Not at all. You can have two kids that do the same chores with perfection and one could be doing it because they love you and the other could be doing it to stay out of trouble or with the hope of a greater payment in allowance, treats, privileges, etc. And, for the parent, this is a huge deal. When my son does things for my wife because he wants to see her happy, even in little things like making his bed, it is a vast difference if he is doing them so he can get ice cream. One shows a deep understanding of love for his mom, the other shows that he is merely doing the chore to receive payment. The difference is like having a wife that maintains the house because she loves you and a maid that comes in once a week and barely knows you and could care less about you (besides receiving a paycheck).
This is the same with Christ. God doesn't want obedient children that just want to stay out of trouble (hell or judgment) or to receive God's gifts of a good life (which may or may not happen). God desires for the person's heart to be changed in a loving understanding of the depths of redemption that was paid on their behalf. He isn't using trickery of the mind, but is changing the heart to be knitted to his own. This is why when someone understands this love of God, God's commandments are not burdensome. Because God's love and approval of me, has nothing to do with my obedience, but of Christ's obedience.
The proof is found directly in the Bible. Just look at David vs the Pharisees. To be honest, the Pharisees were far superior to David in outward works. David was an adulterer, murderer, depressed and sort of skitzophrenic in his relationship with God. But David was a man that was said to be a man after God's own heart. Why? Because he knew that God was his redemption and although he tried his hardest to live that out, he knew himself to be a sinner in need of help from his Father and future Bridegroom.
On the other hand, you have the Pharisees that were close to perfect on the outside, but Christ called them white washed tombs and sons of the devil. Why? Because they did their works out of obligation for payment of eternal life and God's gifts, not because they loved God.
This isn't trickery. This isn't some sort of mind game. This is true biblical love that is shown in God's work on our behalf, so that we could display his work to others.
King David puts it this way:
Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired;
My ears You have opened;
Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required.
Then I said, “Behold, I come;
In the scroll of the book it is written of me.
I delight to do Your will, O my God;
Your Law is within my heart.”
Psalm 40:6-8
But, when you think of this: didn’t God say that burnt offerings and sin offering were required? But notice that David says he does these things not to earn God’s favor but does it because he delights to do God’s will, because he loves God.
On the other hand, you have the Pharisees who did good works for payment from God. Jesus had this to say to them:
Read More......
He actually went as far as to say that because I believe in the grace of the cross that must mean that my God will be happy if I remain in "grace" without real changes in my behavior. Which is interesting because Paul received the same questions when he preached on grace:
What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?
May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?
Romans 6:1-2
Now, I know that when speaking to a non-believer in Christ and the authority of the Bible their will be a bit of an unwinnable war between us. So, what I am not trying to do is win them to my side, but explain why I believe that it truly is a big deal to understand a life lived out because of grace instead of a life lived out to receive grace. One is the gospel and the other is historical and contemporary religion. There is a vast difference and it is shown quite clearly in the Scriptures.
Christ tells us this:
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
“Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
“For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
Matthew 11:28-30
“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.
John 14:15
For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.
1 John 5:3
These statements are a big deal. Ones that I found very hard to understand while dealing with being a religious person hoping that my good works would at some point catch the attention of my Creator.
The real understanding of the cross and it's abundance is not trickery or some sort of mind games. It is real and one that is derived from the Spirit opening up, not only the mind, but the affections of the heart to the One who died for me. The outcome of this affection comes true obedience to the Christ, not some sort of obligation to pay him back in some sort of quasi payment plan.
We actually see this happen in real life as well which prove that this obedience out of gratitude and love is not mere mind games and trickery, but real obedience that isn't burdensome.
Why is it that God sets up pictures for us through our lives that depict what a real relationship with him is like? Think of these. Christians are called the bride of Christ, pointing to marriage and God is also called our Father, pointing to the structure of family.
When thinking of marriage and family, true obedience coming out of love is always distinguished from a mere obligation to be paid because one is a spouse or a child.
When thinking of my marriage, I do those things that please my wife because I love her. I do these things out of gratitude for her love for me and our close relationship through the knitting of souls in marriage. I will at times do the dishes, buy her flowers, take her out, clean up after myself, make the bed, etc. not because this is an obligation in marriage, but because I love her. I want to please her, I want to make her happy and do those things which bring her pleasure. These things are not burdensome, but are done because of my deep rooted love for my wife. I have asked my wife, "If I cheated on you, would you divorce me?" She responded, "although it would be hard, I would do all I could to stay married and honor our marriage and God." Now, do I go off cheating on her to take advantage of the situation? Or, do I understand how much I love her and how much she loves me and honor her?
The same is with Christ. I don't do good things because if I don't he won't love me. I do the things of Christ because of the great love he displayed for my sake on the cross and the resurrection. This is not trickery of the mind, but a correct understanding of the gospel. If it was mere trickery, then what is the difference between a husband who does things for his wife's pleasure out of love and the one who does those things so the wife won't divorce him and take half of his money?
The same can be seen within the structure of the family. As a parent, I don't want mere obedience, no parent truly does. Now, is it nice when our kids are obedient instead of unruly? Yes, but does this prove that they love us? Not at all. You can have two kids that do the same chores with perfection and one could be doing it because they love you and the other could be doing it to stay out of trouble or with the hope of a greater payment in allowance, treats, privileges, etc. And, for the parent, this is a huge deal. When my son does things for my wife because he wants to see her happy, even in little things like making his bed, it is a vast difference if he is doing them so he can get ice cream. One shows a deep understanding of love for his mom, the other shows that he is merely doing the chore to receive payment. The difference is like having a wife that maintains the house because she loves you and a maid that comes in once a week and barely knows you and could care less about you (besides receiving a paycheck).
This is the same with Christ. God doesn't want obedient children that just want to stay out of trouble (hell or judgment) or to receive God's gifts of a good life (which may or may not happen). God desires for the person's heart to be changed in a loving understanding of the depths of redemption that was paid on their behalf. He isn't using trickery of the mind, but is changing the heart to be knitted to his own. This is why when someone understands this love of God, God's commandments are not burdensome. Because God's love and approval of me, has nothing to do with my obedience, but of Christ's obedience.
The proof is found directly in the Bible. Just look at David vs the Pharisees. To be honest, the Pharisees were far superior to David in outward works. David was an adulterer, murderer, depressed and sort of skitzophrenic in his relationship with God. But David was a man that was said to be a man after God's own heart. Why? Because he knew that God was his redemption and although he tried his hardest to live that out, he knew himself to be a sinner in need of help from his Father and future Bridegroom.
On the other hand, you have the Pharisees that were close to perfect on the outside, but Christ called them white washed tombs and sons of the devil. Why? Because they did their works out of obligation for payment of eternal life and God's gifts, not because they loved God.
This isn't trickery. This isn't some sort of mind game. This is true biblical love that is shown in God's work on our behalf, so that we could display his work to others.
King David puts it this way:
Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired;
My ears You have opened;
Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required.
Then I said, “Behold, I come;
In the scroll of the book it is written of me.
I delight to do Your will, O my God;
Your Law is within my heart.”
Psalm 40:6-8
But, when you think of this: didn’t God say that burnt offerings and sin offering were required? But notice that David says he does these things not to earn God’s favor but does it because he delights to do God’s will, because he loves God.
On the other hand, you have the Pharisees who did good works for payment from God. Jesus had this to say to them:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’ ”
Matthew 15:8-9
Jesus wants your heart, not merely your works. But know this: out of a heart that loves God and desires him most, good works will come.
If there is a difference in those relationships that we deal with daily, then we must ask why is there a difference and where did it come from? It came from the God who created us for his glory to do his will because he first loved us.
This isn't some mind game that is made up. This isn't trickery. This is real obedience to One that I love and adore. To him, that makes all the difference, to the homeless guy who gets fed, it doesn't matter...he just wants food.
So, although it looks like the same thing to someone who does not know God, they don't know the heart of the man. So, although two people can be doing the same good works and both look holy, one of them could be doing it out of a loving obedience and the other out of obligation for payment.
Monday, October 19, 2009
The Church Are My Homeboys Gear
I am not sure why I am doing this...but I designed something that is grammatically terrible, but theologically true. If you want to purchase something take a look at the storefront...enjoy your shopping.
Read More......
Derek Webb Uses "Vulgarity" With His Eyes Closed
My buddy David, over at Calvin and Calvinism, pointed out this video by Derek Webb. The song is on worrying more about language and such, than the "stuff" that matters more. Now, as I am definitely not a language Puritan, not sure that this is the right venue, meaning a public one, to show off his language skills. I am sure that Derek and I would get along great over a beer and shooting the ...uhhh... stuff about culture and Christ and the contextualization of the gospel. But, just not sure if cussing in public is the right thing for us to promote.
I say this and I am still going to put up the video and the lyrics. As usual, let the comments fly, and to all you anonymous commentors that I know will comment (maybe not now)...chicken. So, enjoy, but know that there are a couple of words that could be offensive to the viewing public even though they are used in the right context. The song is called "What Matters More" off of his album "Stockholm Syndrome".
Click "read more" to view the lyrics.
You say you always treat people like you like to be
I guess you love being hated for your sexuality
You love when people put words in your mouth
'Bout what you believe, make you sound like a freak
'Cause if you really believe what you say you believe
You wouldn't be so damn reckless with the words you speak
Wouldn't silently conceal when the liars speak
Denyin' all the dyin' of the remedy
Tell me, brother, what matters more to you?
Tell me, sister, what matters more to you?
If I can tell what's in your heart by what comes out of your mouth
Then it sure looks to me like being straight is all it's about
It looks like being hated for all the wrong things
Like chasin' the wind while the pendulum swings
'Cause we can talk and debate until we're blue in the face
About the language and tradition that he's comin' to save
Meanwhile we sit just like we don't give a shit
About 50,000 people who are dyin' today
Tell me, brother, what matters more to you?
Tell me, sister, what matters more to you?
Machen on Biblical Inerrancy
I have been reading Nichols' book entitled, "Ancient Word, Changing Worlds: The Doctrine of Scripture", and I came to a quote from Machen from his book, "Christianity and Liberalism" which I found to be very helpful and insightful. Remember that this book by Machen was written in 1923:
This doctrine of "plenary inspiration" has been made the subject of persistent misrepresentation. Its opponents speak of it as though it involved a mechanical theory of the activity of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit, it is said, is represented in this doctrine as dictating the Bible to writers who were really little more than stenographers. But of course all such caricatures are without basis in fact, and it is rather surprising that intelligent men should be so blinded by prejudice about this matter as not even to examine for themselves the perfectly accessible treatises in which the doctrine of plenary inspiration is set forth...
The modern liberal rejects not only the doctrine of plenary inspiration, but even such respect for the Bible as would be proper over against any ordinarily trustworthy book. But what is substituted for the Christian view of the Bible ? What is the liberal view as to the seat of authority in religion?
The impression is sometimes produced that the modern liberal substitutes for the authority of the Bible the authority of Christ. He cannot accept, he says, what he regards as the perverse moral teaching of the Old Testament or the sophistical arguments of Paul. But he regards himself as being the true Christian because, rejecting the rest of the Bible, he depends upon Jesus alone.
This impression, however, is utterly false. The modern liberal does not really hold to the authority of Jesus. Even if he did so, indeed, he would still be impoverishing greatly his knowledge of God and of the way of salvation. The words of Jesus, spoken during His earthly ministry, could hardly contain all that we need to know about God and about the way of salvation; for the meaning of Jesus' redeeming work could hardly be fully set forth before that work was done. It could be set forth indeed by way of prophecy, and as a matter of fact it was so set forth by Jesus even in the days of His flesh. But the full explanation could naturally be given only after the work was done. And such was actually the divine method. It is doing despite, not only to the Spirit of God, but also to Jesus Himself, to regard the teaching of the Holy Spirit, given through the apostles, as at all inferior in authority to the teaching of Jesus...
It is not true at all, then, that modern liberalism is based upon the authority of Jesus. It is obliged to reject a vast deal that is absolutely essential in Jesus' example and teaching--notably His consciousness of being the heavenly Messiah. The real authority, for liberalism, can only be "the Christian consciousness" or "Christian experience." But how shall the findings of the Christian consciousness be established? Surely not by a majority vote of the organized Church. Such a method would obviously do away with all liberty of conscience. The only authority, then, can be individual experience; truth can only be that which "helps" the individual man. Such an authority is obviously no authority at all; for individual experience is endlessly diverse, and when once truth is regarded only as that which works at any particular time, it ceases to be truth. The result is an abysmal skepticism.
The Christian man, on the other hand, finds in the Bible the very Word of God. Let it not be said that dependence upon a book is a dead or an artificial thing. The Reformation of the sixteenth century was founded upon the authority of the Bible, yet it set the world aflame. Dependence upon a word of man would be slavish, but dependence upon God's word is life. Dark and gloomy would be the world, if we were left to our own devices and had no blessed Word of God. The Bible, to the Christian is not a burdensome law, but the very Magna Charta of Christian liberty.
It is no wonder, then, that liberalism is totally different from Christianity, for the foundation is different. Christianity is founded upon the Bible. It bases upon the Bible both its thinking and its life. Liberalism on the other hand is founded upon the shifting emotions of sinful men.
J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism, pgs. 73-74,76
Friday, October 16, 2009
How Should We Then Live?
I have heard so much about this book that I finally had to pick it up and read it because of me love of Schaeffer's earlier works, which you can find my reviews here on those. I am not sure what I was expecting, but what I found was really a regurgitation of earlier works to be adapted to a film series that Schaeffer and his son were going to do. Not that the book was bad, it just wasn't anything new from Schaeffer's earlier works.
The book is based off the passage found in Ezekiel 33:1-11,19 where you will find the title in verse 10 and then the answer to the question in verse 19:
1Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
2Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man of their coasts, and set him for their watchman:
3If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people;
4Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head.
5He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul.
6But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand.
7So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me.
8When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
9Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.
10Therefore, O thou son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; Thus ye speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live?
11Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
19But if the wicked turn from his wickedness, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall live thereby.
This book is good for those who have never read Schaeffer. He, as usual, masterfully shows through the rise and decline of nations how their thought of God has been determined and shown it through a nation's art and culture. He walks through early Rome, the Middle Ages, the Reformation, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, etc. to show how the belief in God, or lack thereof, was shown through music, theatrical playwrights, paintings, and even architecture. He really sums up well whole cultures throughout history to show the flow of thought as a whole.
As with all of his books he focuses primarily on the arguments posed by those who ascribe to non-absolutes and shows how this thought has ruined, and will continue to ruin, the reason for man and the value of man. After he shows how these people have portrayed their beliefs in all of culture, he breaks down the reason why the belief in the Christian God makes more sense and is a reality.
Even if one isn't a Christian, the flow of culture that is shown by Schaeffer is not a grind but a real joy to read. He shows this over and over again in all of his books the reality of the impact our cultures have on our thinking and values.
Although I do recommend the book, I would then quickly follow up with his earlier works which give even greater detail. But, I will also say that I enjoyed the fact that this book included pictures of the art and people that Schaeffer spoke about. Usually I would be googling those different aspects of art and film that Schaeffer mentioned because of how much detail he sometimes goes into when referencing different pieces in history. This part I much enjoyed about this book.
Recommended
Buy from the following:
Crossway Books
Westminster Books
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Will America Fall Like Rome?
I have been reading Schaeffer's "How Should We Then Live?" and he comes to the point towards the end of the book of the problem with modern modern man...which is another way to say before his time, postmodern man. He is showing the rise of this man throughout the history of cultures around the world. As he does this, he comes to the point of where he saw the United States in the mid 1970's, which is when the book was written. The sad thing, is that this country looks a lot like Rome when it fell. Here is where Schaeffer is making his point from:
Edward Gibbon (1737-1794) in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776-1788) said that the following five attributes marked Rome at its end:
1. A mounting love of show and luxury (that is, affluence)
2. A widening gap between the very rich and the very poor (this could be countries in the family of nations as well as in a single nation)
3. An obsession with sex
4. Freakishness in the arts, masquerading as originality and enthusiasms pretending to be creativity (I put some pictures that I took from the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art so you could see up close the absurdity)
5. An increased desire to live off the state
This was Schaeffer quoting Gibbon back in the 70's. How far we have come in a mere 30 years to show that Schaeffer was noticing something even then what was coming. I just wonder how close we are to calling ourselves Romerica. (click read more to look at SFMOMA Pictures.
Edward Gibbon (1737-1794) in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776-1788) said that the following five attributes marked Rome at its end:
1. A mounting love of show and luxury (that is, affluence)
2. A widening gap between the very rich and the very poor (this could be countries in the family of nations as well as in a single nation)
3. An obsession with sex
4. Freakishness in the arts, masquerading as originality and enthusiasms pretending to be creativity (I put some pictures that I took from the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art so you could see up close the absurdity)
5. An increased desire to live off the state
This was Schaeffer quoting Gibbon back in the 70's. How far we have come in a mere 30 years to show that Schaeffer was noticing something even then what was coming. I just wonder how close we are to calling ourselves Romerica. (click read more to look at SFMOMA Pictures.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Faith and Reason: Do They War Against Each Other?
This morning I was having quite the discussion based on this quote by one of my favorite theologians, Martin Luther:
"Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. "
Now, some (I don't think all the guys I was discussing this with would take it this way) take this quote and use it for some help in an understanding that our faith isn't reasonable or logical. But, this is not what Luther was trying to get across. We must take Luther in his context and whom his fight was against. His fight was against Rome who was taking their theological constructs from Aristotle and Aquinas. Both of these men put revelation (Scripture) and reason on an even playing field. In actuality, they usually would put reason completely above Scripture in any competing argument.
So, when Luther is speaking of things such as reason and logic, he is not speaking about throwing them out all together, but making sure that they keep within the context of the revealed faith in our Scriptures. A clearer quote from Luther came from a debate Luther had where he said that,
Reason is a whore
This is clearer because reason is not sinful or wrong in it's context it should be used in. If used inappropriately beyond the confines that God has placed it in, one can then abuse what God has made to be good. Think of sex within the context of this quote. Sex is not wrong in the correct, godly context, but taken outside of the bounds which God has placed it, one becomes a whore.
So, should we have a reasonable faith? Yes. God calls us to. There is never a story of faith in the Bible that was a blind faith, or one without reason. We are even told that Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac because of his understanding that God would raise him from the dead (Hebrews 11:17-19). He wasn't blindly walking up the mountain to sacrifice his son to an unreasonable and irrational god.
What one finds as they search the Scriptures and then tests them to the things of this world is a rational, reasonable God. This God is who gives us our reasonable faith so that we can trust in him. One does not take a blind leap of trust or faith. Faith without reason is foolish, reason without faith is pointless and damning. The reason I say that it is foolish is that no one should trust in something or someone without a reason. Why should we trust in Christ and his cross? Because God has given us reasons to do so. Do we always understand these reasons? No. But we do have reason and rationality to believe and trust in the Scriptures and the God who speaks through them. This also goes with someone who has intellect and reason but no faith. They are damned and without hope, because their reason and rationality aren't directed to the one who underlines their whole life of worship.
These two aren't warring but must work together. We even have the definition of faith in Hebrews that points to reason and logic within the person that has faith:
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
Hebrews 11:1
Assurance and conviction do not come about through the air, but through a reasonable understanding of whom or what you are putting your faith and trust in. This is why when reason tells us something that seems to contradict the Bible we must put our attention on the reasonable God who is infinite. Our faith is reasonable and logical, but when life doesn't make sense in our finite minds, we must have faith in our infinite God.
Know that I am not saying one can merely come to God through reason, but one cannot come to God without a rational reason for doing so. One doesn't just one day wake up from being an Atheist to a blood bought Christian.
If you want to think about it this way. Today I am putting faith in the building that I am in. I have faith that it won't collapse on my head because of my minute knowledge in engineering and architecture and my experience of being in this building everyday. This is a reasonable faith not a blind one.
One will also notice how God tells us to report on this faith:
but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;
1 Peter 3:15
Peter uses the term "apologia" which of course is where we get the use of apologetics, which means to make a defense. Actually in the Strongs it says, "to make a reasoned statement." The term was used for courtrooms where something was defended with evidence and reason. One wouldn't walk into a courtroom and tell the jury, "just believe me."
Neither would God. He is always giving us more and more reasons to believe in Him. He has given us reasons and logic and rationality to have faith in him and he has never asked to follow blindly.
This doesn't mean we'll always understand or have a depth of knowledge in any given situation, but we can have faith in those times because our God has always been faithful and just and he alone is the evidence and reason to believe in those times.
If he didn't give us evidence and assurance then we would never believe the following:
...for He Himself has said, “I will never desert you, nor will I ever forsake you,”
so that we confidently say, “The Lord is my helper, I will not be afraid. What will man do to me?”
Hebrews 13:5b-6
When someone asks why you believe, never tell someone to "I just believe" or to "I had to take a leap of faith" because God has never asked you to do so.
Check out this short video on this topic as it gives a great summation in under 4 minutes: Faith vs Reason
HT: Mark at Here I Blog
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
