I just have to post it. I can't help it.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Follow Me...
We had a fascinating discussion last night in our community group. Consider Paul's boldness in saying, "Follow me, as I follow Christ." Consider yourself saying to another brother or sister the same. Could you say it without feeling awkward?...sinful?...prideful? Paul did...and apparently God approved as it's recorded in the Sacred Writings.
The discussion flowed out of a weariness in hearing 'celebrity' pastors praised. Some get tired of hearing about Piper, Driscoll, Dever...or whoever is in their camp. And it has the potential to turn you off to that person, just from getting tired of their being lauded. Some pastors certainly do feed off of this praise, and there is great danger in allowing yourself to be puffed up with others' tickling of your ego, but I think that the greater issue is this: when people praise these people, what they are really saying is, "I love John Piper, because John Piper loves and points me to Jesus." For this is what John Piper would say to the person who would say, "John Piper, I love your ministry."
Piper: "Follow me, as I follow Christ."
A couple questions arise for me:
1. Can I say without shame, pride, or duplicity, "Follow me, as I follow Christ"?
2. Is there someone in my immediate life (not a 'celebrity' kind of person) whom I follow as they follow Christ?
Do you have someone you are following...watching them relate to the opposite sex, watching them respond to conflict, watching them fail well, watching them have a godly sense of humor, watching them love their family...
Too bad that most of us would have to say, "Follow me as I dink around life foolishly."
The discussion flowed out of a weariness in hearing 'celebrity' pastors praised. Some get tired of hearing about Piper, Driscoll, Dever...or whoever is in their camp. And it has the potential to turn you off to that person, just from getting tired of their being lauded. Some pastors certainly do feed off of this praise, and there is great danger in allowing yourself to be puffed up with others' tickling of your ego, but I think that the greater issue is this: when people praise these people, what they are really saying is, "I love John Piper, because John Piper loves and points me to Jesus." For this is what John Piper would say to the person who would say, "John Piper, I love your ministry."
Piper: "Follow me, as I follow Christ."
A couple questions arise for me:
1. Can I say without shame, pride, or duplicity, "Follow me, as I follow Christ"?
2. Is there someone in my immediate life (not a 'celebrity' kind of person) whom I follow as they follow Christ?
Do you have someone you are following...watching them relate to the opposite sex, watching them respond to conflict, watching them fail well, watching them have a godly sense of humor, watching them love their family...
Too bad that most of us would have to say, "Follow me as I dink around life foolishly."
Monday, June 1, 2009
Grumpy Old Man
So I was having a great day out yesterday with my wife and a couple friends of ours. We were playing tennis and it was a gorgeous day. My wife and I are novices at best...the stage where you're still hitting the ball over the fence regularly because you haven't quite grasped not to hit it like a baseball. An older man in a bright pink shirt and red tennis shoes rode up on his Harley Davidson, and by the way he was dressed, it was obvious he hadn't ridden far, so the assumption is that he lives in Montreat (wealthy community). Putting these factors together, I have surmised that this man is a wealthy eccentric with not much to do. Even if this is not true, it makes me feel better to assume it to be so.
We had a ball outside the fence (see above), so when the gentleman (term used loosely) pulled up on his bike, I walked over to the fence and asked him if he could kindly get our ball for us. It went something like, "Hey, could you do us a favor? When you get unsaddled, could you throw our ball over?" He then said something unintelligible. To which I replied, "Huh?" He then said something again, which I did not understand. At this point (I'm sure you've been there), it's the awkward moment where you feel the dilemma rising up within you if you should ask again or just pretend like you understood. I asked again. He then said, finally without mush in his mouth, "GIVE ME A MINUTE." Hmmm. Was that not implied in my question, "When you get unsaddled..." I thought so, but apparently, a simple "yes" or "sure" would not suffice for this sour man. So I "gave him a minute" and he returned the ball. I was a bit miffed at his demeanor and wondered to myself, "Why are some people so sour, especially on a day like today...at the tennis courts?" Had it been the DMV, or church, I may have understood. I shook it off and dismissed it quickly as I wanted to return to our match/inning.
A sidenote should be mentioned. There are 5 courts where we play. 5. We were on the side court. It is a LONG way to the 5th court...plenty of room. Being the only ones there, space abounded for any other racqueteers that might wish to play. When grumpy came, he chose the court adjacent to ours. Hmmm again. Interesting. It's like coming into a men's bathroom when multiple urinals are lined up on the wall. Men rules apply, and they are universal. Man #1 takes one on the outsides. Man #2 finds a spot at least one away. It makes sense in my mind that the urinal rule should also apply on tennis courts. Collateral damage is a possibility in both places. In the bathroom, in is mostly the mental/emotional damage of being next to a man in a confined space with man parts exposed. Why would you choose the closest spot? Men don't do this unless there is some sort of social disability involved. Physical collateral damage is possible in the urinal analogy, but only if bad aim is a real issue with one of the parties. On the tennis court, the collateral damage is mostly physical with the inconveneince of potential stray tennis balls coming over from other players' courts. My point in all this is to say: if there are four more open courts, pick a court one away. It just makes sense.
So some time passes and the foursome of older men warms up and begins playing next to our court. We did a good job of keeping our balls under control, but one happened to roll along the fence behind their court. They were not in the middle of a point, so I proceeded to walk along the fence to retrieve our ball from their area. The aforementioned man picked up my ball and beckoned me to come to him, which I then proceeded to do. I put out my hand to get the ball and thanked him at which point he withheld the ball and said succinctly, "Tennis etiquette: your ball can come over, but you cain't." My shocked and dumbfounded retort was an impotent, "Ok, thanks." About a half hour later, many other options came to mind. My favorite being, "Life etiquette: Don't be an ass."
My point; I don't want to be a grumpy old man with a pink shirt and red tennis shoes and nothing good to say. What if the tables were turned? What if some 10 year-olds came and were next to us and having more fun than serious competion? Would I look at them and have good things to think and say? Would I invest in them, even if just in minor ways withholding negativity toward them? I honestly have to answer and say, "I don't know." Maybe I am growing into the man that has the pink shirt, red shoes, and mouth full of manure (in diction and content). I hope not. In the end, I think the experience was good for me, though at the time, I did not like it. God sends lessons through asses in the Old Testament, and he sends lessons through the same on the tennis court.
We had a ball outside the fence (see above), so when the gentleman (term used loosely) pulled up on his bike, I walked over to the fence and asked him if he could kindly get our ball for us. It went something like, "Hey, could you do us a favor? When you get unsaddled, could you throw our ball over?" He then said something unintelligible. To which I replied, "Huh?" He then said something again, which I did not understand. At this point (I'm sure you've been there), it's the awkward moment where you feel the dilemma rising up within you if you should ask again or just pretend like you understood. I asked again. He then said, finally without mush in his mouth, "GIVE ME A MINUTE." Hmmm. Was that not implied in my question, "When you get unsaddled..." I thought so, but apparently, a simple "yes" or "sure" would not suffice for this sour man. So I "gave him a minute" and he returned the ball. I was a bit miffed at his demeanor and wondered to myself, "Why are some people so sour, especially on a day like today...at the tennis courts?" Had it been the DMV, or church, I may have understood. I shook it off and dismissed it quickly as I wanted to return to our match/inning.
A sidenote should be mentioned. There are 5 courts where we play. 5. We were on the side court. It is a LONG way to the 5th court...plenty of room. Being the only ones there, space abounded for any other racqueteers that might wish to play. When grumpy came, he chose the court adjacent to ours. Hmmm again. Interesting. It's like coming into a men's bathroom when multiple urinals are lined up on the wall. Men rules apply, and they are universal. Man #1 takes one on the outsides. Man #2 finds a spot at least one away. It makes sense in my mind that the urinal rule should also apply on tennis courts. Collateral damage is a possibility in both places. In the bathroom, in is mostly the mental/emotional damage of being next to a man in a confined space with man parts exposed. Why would you choose the closest spot? Men don't do this unless there is some sort of social disability involved. Physical collateral damage is possible in the urinal analogy, but only if bad aim is a real issue with one of the parties. On the tennis court, the collateral damage is mostly physical with the inconveneince of potential stray tennis balls coming over from other players' courts. My point in all this is to say: if there are four more open courts, pick a court one away. It just makes sense.
So some time passes and the foursome of older men warms up and begins playing next to our court. We did a good job of keeping our balls under control, but one happened to roll along the fence behind their court. They were not in the middle of a point, so I proceeded to walk along the fence to retrieve our ball from their area. The aforementioned man picked up my ball and beckoned me to come to him, which I then proceeded to do. I put out my hand to get the ball and thanked him at which point he withheld the ball and said succinctly, "Tennis etiquette: your ball can come over, but you cain't." My shocked and dumbfounded retort was an impotent, "Ok, thanks." About a half hour later, many other options came to mind. My favorite being, "Life etiquette: Don't be an ass."
My point; I don't want to be a grumpy old man with a pink shirt and red tennis shoes and nothing good to say. What if the tables were turned? What if some 10 year-olds came and were next to us and having more fun than serious competion? Would I look at them and have good things to think and say? Would I invest in them, even if just in minor ways withholding negativity toward them? I honestly have to answer and say, "I don't know." Maybe I am growing into the man that has the pink shirt, red shoes, and mouth full of manure (in diction and content). I hope not. In the end, I think the experience was good for me, though at the time, I did not like it. God sends lessons through asses in the Old Testament, and he sends lessons through the same on the tennis court.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
My Own Prison
Quote taken from Reformers in the Wings by David C. Steinmetz - on a chapter highlighting Johannes Von Staupitz (1460/9 - 1524)"The problem is not that sinners have lost sight of the demand of God that is laid on them or are slothful and unwilling to make use of their ability to obey the will of God. If that were so, then moral education and exhortation could awaken sinners to their predicament and enable them to assume their responsibilities towards God and the nighbor. The problem is, rather, that the human will is the prisoner of its own self-love and cannot release itself from that bondage. This misdirected love has worked havoc in the human soul. There is no inner citadel of the soul that has fought the enemy to a standstill and escaped the effects of the fall. On the contrary, sinners are not only unable to earn merits, they are even, as Augustine had rightly argued, unable to act virtuously. When the nominalists urged sinners to do their very best and assured them that God would reward their very best with his grace, they were reading a sentence of death over the human race. Fallen men and women cannot love God supremely even if they try--and there is no reason to be sanguine about the possibility that they will try."
Pursue good thoughts...pursue sound theology.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Quote to Ponder
In my previous blog, I mentioned my current reading of Far As the Curse is Found by Michael D. Williams. This morning in my reading of his chapter entitled "The Law," I read
"Never knowing how to satisfy someone produces slavery."
His purpose was to show God's law as given at Sinai as an avenue of freedom for God's redeemed people. Our view of law is usually the opposite...stifling, rigid, suffocating. But I think his point is excellent. If we don't know what satisfies someone, we're left wondering how to please...a slave to the 'figuring out' of what it takes to walk in accordance with their desires. How often does this happen with spouses? "What do I have to do to make them happy?" "I thought that they would appreciate this..."
God has graciously laid out what satisfies Him...how to walk in His ways. Law truly makes free.
Last point to remember...the Israelites at Sinai were redeemed and chosen by God before the Law was given. After the redemption came the Law. Following the Law does not make us God's people. God makes us His people, then graciously frees us to please Him and walk with Him by showing us His law.
"Never knowing how to satisfy someone produces slavery."
His purpose was to show God's law as given at Sinai as an avenue of freedom for God's redeemed people. Our view of law is usually the opposite...stifling, rigid, suffocating. But I think his point is excellent. If we don't know what satisfies someone, we're left wondering how to please...a slave to the 'figuring out' of what it takes to walk in accordance with their desires. How often does this happen with spouses? "What do I have to do to make them happy?" "I thought that they would appreciate this..."
God has graciously laid out what satisfies Him...how to walk in His ways. Law truly makes free.
Last point to remember...the Israelites at Sinai were redeemed and chosen by God before the Law was given. After the redemption came the Law. Following the Law does not make us God's people. God makes us His people, then graciously frees us to please Him and walk with Him by showing us His law.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Obligation to God
This title is a bit misleading for it is only a minor part of the whole. I'm reading a fantastic book, which is an introduction to Covenant Theology. I am incredibly thankful for it as I've longed for a good introduction to this particular theological framework. The book is Far as the Curse is Found by Michael Williams. The thought that has been thrilling my soul...in a very simple yet profound way: Covenant relationship always precedes obligation. God calls us into relationship with Him before obligations are required. He wants relationship, then obligation flows out from the joy of being in relationship with Him. Not very profound as I type and re-read...but profound when I actually stop and meditate on the wonder of it. He's called me in to a relationship with Himself. Creator desiring the created. Thanks Father.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Paul sings Nessun Dorma high quality video/sound widescreen 16:9
This video has the ability to produce tears. I don't even know why it makes me weepy really...just does.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Loving God with All Your Mind
Working in an institution of higher ed. is sometimes extremely encouraging. At times, the 'headiness' can be a subtle environment for pride to sneak in a destroy, but overall, I'm pleased to be in an envoronment where thinking is encouraged. Christ himself encourages this when he calls us to "love the Lord your God...with all your mind." In many of your conversations, does it not seem that it is unpopular to think? In a recent e-mail from a professor on campus, I've been reminded that many times, people simply interact with issues on the emotional level...how it makes them feel...not fully engaging logic and reason. Don't get me wrong: I think we all long for our emotional fulfillment as well, but for our worship to be holistic, I believe that our emotion should flow from engaging our minds with truth.
It's the times in worship that I engage my mind with the truth of what I'm singing that I find myself in tears.
My challenge today...find people who stir your mind...even if you don't agree with them. Talk with them...be intentional about having heady conversations...but then...don't let it stop there...worship the God who gave you the ability to think.
It's the times in worship that I engage my mind with the truth of what I'm singing that I find myself in tears.
My challenge today...find people who stir your mind...even if you don't agree with them. Talk with them...be intentional about having heady conversations...but then...don't let it stop there...worship the God who gave you the ability to think.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Pulling Rank
An interesting thing occurred last night. I received a disturbing line of communication in e-mail format. I don't know if it had poor motives behind it, but is was enough to prompt me to think about pulling rank. It's abusive to pull rank, and I think we're all prone to it on some level. I'm not a parent yet, but I imagine it would be easy to pull the 'because I'm dad' card. I AM a husband, and in years past, I borderlined on pulling the leadership card. I've seen pastors pull the 'submit' card in order to quell 'divisiveness' that really was dialogue for the purpose of growth, personal and corporate.
Don't get me wrong, I think rank has its place, just the abuse of it is where the rub comes.
I'm glad God doesn't pull rank...we'd all be crushed without hope.
"He who knew no sin became sin for us......"
He is good.
Don't get me wrong, I think rank has its place, just the abuse of it is where the rub comes.
I'm glad God doesn't pull rank...we'd all be crushed without hope.
"He who knew no sin became sin for us......"
He is good.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Submitting to Sovereignty
25 Then the king said to Zadok, “Carry the ark of God back into the city. If I find favor in the eyes of the Lord, he will bring me back and let me see both it and his dwelling place. 26 But if he says, ‘I have no pleasure in you,’ behold, here I am, let him do to me what seems good to him.”
This passage from 2 Samuel 15 caused me to, once again, rejoice in God's sovereignty through David's statement. Am I confident enough in God's good purposes even to say to Him, "Do what seems good to You," even if it means that I am the object of his displeasure? This statement of David's is packed with trust in God's sovereign purposes. How many TV preachers proclaim this gospel: God does what pleases Him, and that might mean my harm, not my prosperity....and He's still good.
This passage from 2 Samuel 15 caused me to, once again, rejoice in God's sovereignty through David's statement. Am I confident enough in God's good purposes even to say to Him, "Do what seems good to You," even if it means that I am the object of his displeasure? This statement of David's is packed with trust in God's sovereign purposes. How many TV preachers proclaim this gospel: God does what pleases Him, and that might mean my harm, not my prosperity....and He's still good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
