shawn thoughts

Karl Barth: The Power of the Word of God

2010-11-22T14:01:00.000-05:00

Commenting on Romans 1:16 & 1 Cor. 1:18 Barth writes:

"If a man knew nothing of this power that both sustains and stimulates, both protects and punishes, both pacifies and disturbs, if he merely heard about it without knowing it as a power, he would only give evidence that he knew nothing of the Word of God. We are acquainted with the Word of God to the degree that we are acquainted with this power. We speak of God's Word when we speak in recollection and expectation of this power, and when we do so in such a way that we realise that this power of the Word of God is not one power among others, not even among other divine powers, but the one unique divine power which comes home to us, to which we are referred, in face of which we stand in decision between the obedience we owe it and the unfathomable inconceivability of disobedience, and consequently in the decision between bliss and perdition." (I.1 150)

Saturday Night Live on the Folly of Positive Thinking

2010-11-15T15:20:00.002-05:00

2 Corinthians 12:9 "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." -Jesus

"It is certain that man must utterly despair of his own ability before he is prepared to receive the grace of Christ." -Martin Luther

"So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making. They arise out of ourselves, and the alcoholic is an extreme example of the self-will run riot, though he usually doesn't think so. Above everything, we alcoholics must rid of this selfishness. We must, or it will kill us! God makes that possible. And there often seems no way of entirely getting rid of self without His aid. Many of us had moral and philosophical convictions galore, but we could not live up to them even though we would have liked to. Neither could we reduce our self-centeredness much by wishing or trying on our own power. We had to have God's help.

This is the how and why of it. First of all, we had to quit playing God. It didn't work. Next, we decided that hereafter in this drama of life, God was going to be our Director. He is the Principal; we are His agents. He is the Father, and we are his children. Most good ideas are simple, and this concept was the keystone of the new and triumphant arch through which we passed to freedom." -Alcoholics Anonymous the Big Book

Karl Barth on the Importance of Theology.

2010-11-13T23:16:00.000-05:00

I'm currently trudging my way through Karl Barth's massive Church Dogmatics. My goal is to get through the whole 14 vol. set over the next several years. Needless to say, I'll be sharing some of his gems as I come across them. Here's Barth on the importance of theological work:

"How disastrously the Church must misunderstand itself if it can imagine that theology is the business of a few theoreticians who are specially appointed for the purpose, to whom the rest, as hearty practical men, may sometimes listen with half an ear, though for their own part they boast of living 'quite untheologically' for the demands of the day ('love'). As though these practical men were not continually preaching and speaking and writing, and were not genuinely questioned as to the rightness of their activity in this regard! As though there were anything more practical than giving this question its head, which means doing the work of theology..."

"As though there could be any more urgent task for a Church under assault from without than that of consolidating itself within, which means doing theological work!"

"The whole Church must seriously want a serious theology if it is to have a serious theology."

"The freedom claimed when men think they can and should theologise 'quite untheologically' is the freedom to prattle heretically or in a way that makes for heresy. There is no room in the Church for this freedom."

Church Dogmatics I1 76-77

Horton Quote

2010-09-23T16:37:00.000-04:00

"The Gospel changes lives precisely because it is not about us-even our changed lives-but about Christ. The life of every Christian is filled with enough inconsistencies to disprove the Christian faith every day if it were based on our changed lives. The history of the church is littered not only with heresies and schisms but with crusades, inquisitions, and the justification of atrocities in the name of Christ. Yet in all of this we can point away from ourselves, individually and collectively, to "the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). In fact, it is only by repenting of our spiritual pride and casting ourselves anew on God's mercy in his Son that we can ever become servants rather than masters of our neighbors."
-"The Gospel Driven Life" Micheal Horton

An Interesting Quote about Worship

2010-09-20T12:16:00.000-04:00

Sorry I'm having no original ideas of late. So here's some interesting thoughts about worship from an excellent book:

"Is worship, then, essentially an experience or feeling? Is it to be identified with a special sense of the presence of God, or with some kind of religious ecstasy or with expressions of deep humiliation before God? Are there truly special moments in a Christian meeting when we are truly 'worshiping' God? Are church services to be measured by the extent to which they enable the participants to enter into such experiences? Such a subjective approach is often reflected in the comments people make about Christian gatherings, but it has little to do with biblical teaching on the matter. Furthermore, it creates significant problems for relationships amongst Christians, since not all will share in the same experience and some will inevitably be made to feel that their worship is inferior. Worship must involve certain identifiable attitudes, but something is seriously wrong when people equate spiritual self-gratification with worship!" (17 Emphasis Mine)

This is a great quote from an awesome book called "Engaging With God: a Biblical Theology of Worship." In it author David Peterson looks at the topic of Worship from Genesis to Revelation helping us to see beyond style preferences to what the Bible actually says concerning the subject.

Naked Christianity

2010-08-11T14:22:00.000-04:00

"Losing our illusions is painful because illusions are the stuff we live by. The Spirit of God is the great unmasker of illusions, the great destroyer of icons and idols. God's love for us is so great that He does not permit us to harbor false images, no matter how attached we are to them. God strips those falsehoods from us no matter how naked it may make us, because it is better to live naked in the truth than clothed in fantasy" (13)

Brennan Manning "Lion and Lamb: The Relentless Tenderness of Jesus"

Kierkegaard Quote

2010-07-15T15:09:00.001-04:00

"That Jesus Christ died for my sins certainly shows how great his grace is,
but it also shows how great my sins are." (283)

Kierkegaard. Provocations

John Calvin on Suffering

2010-07-15T13:37:00.000-04:00

"Hence also in harsh and difficult conditions, regarded as adverse and evil, a great comfort comes to us: we share Christ's sufferings in order that as he has passed from a labyrinth of all evils into heavenly glory, we may in like manner be led through various tribulations to the same glory. So Paul himself elsewhere states: when we come to know the sharing of his sufferings, we at the same time grasp the power of his resurrection; and when we become like him in his death, we are thus made ready to share his glorious resurrection [Phil. 3:10-11]. How much can it do to soften all the bitterness of the cross, that the more we are afflicted with adversities, the more surely our fellowship with Christ is confirmed!" (702)

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion

The Surprise Gospel!

2010-06-28T17:03:00.000-04:00

Here are some telling and enlightening words from Michael Horton concerning the need for Gospel centered ministry. He exclaims:

"Gospel is the surprise, and it remains a surprise announcement even to believers. Like a branch that has been bent out of shape, we fall back naturally to being curved in on ourselves unless we are being pulled back constantly to raise our eyes up to God in faith as he has clothed himself in the gospel of his Son. We do not need a reporter to announce to us that we need to be better parents, spouses, and friends; that we should have integrity in our relationships; to be less selfish and more giving; get in the game of life instead of standing on the sidelines; and so forth. Give us advice on these matters and we nod. We begin to take notes and resolve to put them into practice next week. Our ears perk up when we hear exhortations to be all we can be. Our self-righteousness springs to its feet when we are told that we have what it takes if we just put the game plan into practice.
As true as a lot of these exhortations might be, the familiarity of law (things to do) can make us wonder why the message of our churches is all that different and why the Christian message is all that radical. Only the radical news concerning Jesus Christ can distract us from all the trivial pursuits and transform us from the inside out...
It is no wonder that people become bored with church and assume that they can get along well enough in life without it. We need to see God as the headliner again, instead of ourselves" (22-23)

Horton, Michael. The Gospel-Driven Life

PS: For those of you who like surprises!

The Cross, Jurgen Moltmann, & Jesus Camp

2010-06-28T15:11:00.000-04:00

Several months ago I read a book by German Theologian Jurgen Moltmann called “The Crucified God.” Around the same time I rented the controversial film called “Jesus Camp” from Family Video. As I was watching these two theologies (or ways of life) unfold in front of me I couldn’t help but be astounded by the extreme differences of the two.

For those of you unfamiliar with the film:

“‘Jesus Camp’ is about the ‘Kids On Fire School of Ministry,’ a charismatic Christian summer camp located just outside Devils Lake, North Dakota and run by Becky Fischer and her ministry, Kids in Ministry International… At the camp, Fischer stresses the need for children to purify themselves in order to be part of the "army of God". She strongly believes that children need to be in the forefront of turning America toward conservative Christian values. She also feels that Christians need to focus on training kids since "the enemy" (Islam) is focused on training theirs.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jesus_Camp&oldid=355928576)

What struck me as I watched this film was how ‘un’Christian much of the theology professed by Fischer was. Numerous times throughout the film her version of Christianity seemed more like that of Radical Islam than that of the Crucified Messiah. What also struck me was the fact that although Fischer’s version of Christianity was a rather extreme example, I often see her type of theology played out in mainline evangelicalism in much subtler ways. This got me to beg the question, how is it that a religion who believes in a Crucified Messiah can morph into what is being professed in “Kids on Fire School of Ministry” and the like?

This is where Moltmann’s work “The Crucified God,” offered an answer. He writes:

The crisis of the church in present-day (I would argue throughout history) society is not merely the critical choice between assimilation (Liberal Theology) or retreat into the ghetto (Jesus Camp), but the crisis of its own existence as the church of the crucified Christ. (2)

Why is this? Moltmann writes:

In Christianity the cross is the test of everything which deserves to be called Christian. One might add that the cross alone, and nothing else, is its test, since the cross refutes everything, and excludes the syncretistic elements in Christianity. (7)

In short, Moltmann believes that when Christianity loses its identification with the cross it ceases to be Christianity and becomes a combination of different religious ideas and ideals. That’s why Fischer’s Christianity looks more like radical Islam than that founded by Jesus Christ. It is also true (and I know this is somewhat oversimplifying things) that throughout Church history when the cross is ignored that’s when all hell breaks loose. For example, look what happened in the Catholic Church around the time of Luther when it had lost sight of the cross. Or how about when Pentecostal movements smoother the cross with the ecstasy of the spiritual high and Christianity is no longer about what God did through Christ; but rather how I can get more of a charge from the Holy Ghost. Think about the Prosperity Gospel. When the cross is removed their Christianity is no longer about God’s love for sinners in the midst of their pain, but rather achieving your best life now.

These are some of the more fringe examples, but the same rings true even in the more mainline evangelical churches as well. When good things like worship, mission, gifts, and discipleship get put in front of; rather than birthed from the cross; everything gets out of balance. Michael Horton puts it this way, “When even good, holy, and proper things become confused with the gospel, it is only a matter of time before we end up with Christless Christianity" (109).

This is because when Christianity loses its identity in the cross its faith begins to decay and according to Moltmann this kind of faith is:

Fearful and defensive when it begins to die inwardly, struggling to maintain itself and reaching out for security and guarantees. In so doing, it removes itself from the hand of the One who has promised to maintain it, and its own manipulations bring it to ruin.

When the “religion of fear” finds its way into the Christian Church, those who regard themselves as the most vigilant guardians of the faith do violence to faith and smoother it. (19)

These two quotes rang most true as I watched “Jesus Camp.” The “religion of fear” that Moltmann talks about is pictured throughout the whole film. I believe this same “religion of fear” is prevalent in much of our own churches and lives when we forego the cross. Because of this we must remember that at its core, “Christianity is not Judaism and it is not western European secularism, and it is not Islam. What it is, is weakness not strength, Grace not Law, Gospel not church” (Zahl 301). When Christianity loses sight of the cross it loses sight of what is unique to it and thus becomes one more human endeavor to reach God. It becomes what we can do to change others minds, rather than what God has already done in our midst through Jesus. This is why Martin Luther said, “The Cross alone is our theology” (Forde 3).

Peace,

Shawn

Forde, Gehard. “On Being a Theologian of the Cross”

Horton, Michael. “Christless Christianity”

Moltmann, Jurgen. “The Crucified God”

Zahl, Paul. “The Christianity Primer: 2000 Years of Amazing Grace”

Confirmation Videos

2010-06-02T14:05:00.000-04:00

Mike Yaconelli on the Bible

2010-06-01T14:04:00.001-04:00

"Looking back over the years, I realize that the Bible isn't magic, but it is corrective; it isn't an answer book, it is a living book; it isn't a fix-it book, it is a relationship book. When I confront God's word, I am confronted; when I read God's word, it reads me; when I seek God's presence, he seeks me."
-Mike Yaconelli "The Core Realities of Youth Ministry"

Video about William Cowper

2010-05-05T14:30:00.002-04:00

If you've ever struggled with depression and/or any other form of mental illness this video will speak to you. Be warned, the video is a bit graphic.

Peace,
Shawn

PS: For those of you reading this on Facebook go to this link: http://theresurgence.com/Rebels_Guide_William_Cowper

How to Meditate on the Passion of Christ by Martin Luther Part II

2010-04-05T11:10:00.000-04:00

“Up to this point in our discussion, it is as if we have been in Passion Week and Good Friday. Now we come to Easter and Christ’s Resurrection. When a person, whose conscience has been filled with terror, understands his sins in this light, he needs to watch out that his sins do not remain in his conscience, for then nothing but pure doubt will result. Just as our sins flowed out of Christ and we became aware of them, so we should pour them back on Him again and set our conscience free. Make sure you do not bite and devour one another with sins in your heart, running here and there with your own good works, trying to make satisfaction for them, trying to work your way out of your sins by means of indulgences. It is impossible!

“Take your sins and throw them on Christ. Believe with a joyful spirit that your sins are His wounds and sufferings. He carries them and makes satisfaction for them, as Isaiah 53:6 says, “The Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” Peter says in 1 Peter 2:24, “He himself bore our sins in His body on the tree.” In 2 Corinthians 5:21 Paul says, “For our sake, He made Him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.” You must rely on these verses from the Bible with all your might, even more when your conscience tries to kill you. You’ll never find peace if you miss this opportunity to quiet your heart. You will have so much doubt that you will despair. If we dwell too much on our sins, going over and over them in our conscience, keeping them close to our hearts, soon they will become too much for us to manage and they will live forever. But when we see our sins laid on Christ and see Him triumph over them by His Resurrection, and fearlessly believe this, our sins are dead and become nothing. Our sins don’t stay on Christ, but are swallowed up by His resurrection. Now you see no wounds, no pain, no sight of sin at all in Him. That is why Paul says in Romans 4:25 that Jesus “was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.” In His sufferings Christ made our sins known and was crucified for them. By His resurrection He makes us righteous and frees from all sin. If you are not able to believe then pray to God for faith. This is entirely up to God. He gives faith at times very dramatically and openly, and at other times, secretly and quietly.”

For the full text of this work click here.

How to Meditate on the Passion of Christ by Martin Luther Part I

2010-04-02T15:34:00.001-04:00

“When we meditate on the Passion of Christ the right way, we see Christ and are terrified at the sight. Our conscience sinks in despair. This feeling of terror needs to happen so that we fully realize how great the wrath of God is against sin and sinners. We understand this when we see how God sets sinners free only because His dearly beloved Son -- His only Son -- paid such a costly ransom for us, as Isaiah 53:8 says, “He was stricken for the transgressions of my people.”

What happens to us when we see the dear Child of God struck down like this? We realize how inexpressible, even unbearable, is the Son’s total commitment to saving sinners. How else can we feel when we realize that a person so great as Christ went out to meet this fate, suffering and dying for sinners? If you truly and deeply reflect on the fact that God’s Son, the eternal Wisdom of God, suffers, you will be filled with terror. The more you reflect on it the deeper you will feel this way.

You should deeply believe, and never doubt, that in fact you are the one who killed Christ. Your sins did this to Him. St. Peter struck terror in the hearts of the Jews when he said in Acts 2:36-27: “You crucified Him!” Three thousand people were filled with terror. Trembling in fear they cried out to the Apostles, “Dear brothers, what should we do?” Therefore, when you look at the nails being driven through His hands, firmly believe that it is your work. Do you see His crown of thorns? Those thorns are your wicked thoughts.”

For the full text of this work click here.

Holy Week with the Apostolic Fathers

2010-04-02T13:44:00.000-04:00

"O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation! O benefits surpassing all expectation! that the wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous One, and that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors!"
-The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 AD

Holy Week with the Apostolic Fathers

2010-04-01T12:58:00.001-04:00

"Let us then continually persevere in our hope, and the earnest of our righteousness, which is Jesus Christ, 'who bore our sins in His own body on a tree,' 'who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth,' but endured all things for us, that we might live in Him."
-The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians 110-140 AD

Holy Week with the Apostolic Fathers

2010-03-31T23:42:00.001-04:00

"How the one love of God, through exceeding regard for men, did not regard us with hatred, nor thrust us away, nor remember our iniquity against us, but showed great long-suffering, and bore with us, He Himself took on Him the burden of our iniquities, He gave His own Son as a ransom for us, the holy One for transgressors, the blameless One for the wicked, the righteous One for the unrighteous, the incorruptible One for the corruptible, the immortal One for them that are mortal. For what thing was capable of covering our sins than His righteousness? By what other one was it possible that we, the wicked and ungodly, could be justified, than by the only Son of God.
-The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 AD

Holy Week with the Apostolic Fathers

2010-03-30T19:35:00.000-04:00

"Let us look stedfastly to the blood of Christ, and see how precious that blood is to God, which, having been shed for our salvation, has set the grace of repentance before the world"
-The First Epistle of Clement 90 AD

oh rick...

2010-03-09T14:18:00.002-05:00

once again he beats me to the punch...
http://www.ocregister.com/news/church-237227-easter-saddleback.html

Enjoy The Weather

2010-03-04T13:33:00.000-05:00

Yesterday I came across this cool quote from Luther concerning the beauty of God's creation. He writes that creation is:

our Bible in the fullest sense, this our house, home, field, garden, and all things, where God does not only preach by using his wonderful works, but also taps on our eyes, stirs up our senses, and enlightens our heart at the same time... Learn to strengthen your belief in the resurrection of the dead by means of the work that God exercises daily toward his creatures through his omnipotence.
-Sermon of May 25, 1544 on 1 Cor. 15:66

I thought this was an inspiring sentiment to reflect on as the sun finally begins to poke through the winter sky!

Luther Quote!

2010-02-18T12:34:00.000-05:00

Here's an awesome snipped from Luther that I came across in Walther's "Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel." Luther writes:

Thou, my Lord Jesus art my Righteousness; I am Thy sin. Thou hast taken from what is mine and hast given me what is Thine. Thou didst become what Thou wert not and madest me to be what I was not. Beware of your ceaseless striving after a righteousness so great that you no longer appear as a sinner in your own eye and do not want to be a sinner. For Christ dwells only in sinners. He came down from heaven, where He dwelt in the righteous, for the very purpose of dwelling in sinners also. Ponder this love of His, and you will realize His sweetest consolation.
-Martin Luther's Letter to Spalatin

Peace,
Shawn

The Beatitudes: an Introduction

2010-02-16T14:17:00.000-05:00

The group of High School students that I lead is currently engaging, talking, and wrestling with the audacious words of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount found in the Gospel of Matthew. For me this experience has been one of the most exciting and rewarding teaching moments as a Youth Pastor. Because of this I want to share with you over the next several posts some of the things that we as a group have discussed concerning the first part of the Sermon on the Mount: the Beatitudes. This first post will serve as an introduction into just what the Beatitudes are. As a result this post will be much more theological than the others.

The Beatitudes (Lit “The Blessings”) act as an intro into Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. Simply put, they are a beautiful description of the Christian’s experience and character when coming face to face with God’s Kingdom realities. So, in one sense the Beatitudes describe characteristics that ought to define every Christian, but they do so in such a way that the ought becomes the sought. Let me illustrate this.

In the Beatitudes Jesus says, “Blessed are the merciful…” Now, often when this is preached or taught one receives instruction on how they might become more merciful. A person might even be given a to-do list of several merciful acts they can do over the next seven days. The problem with this approach is that first it rips a particular beatitude out of its context thus rendering it useless and second it never works. Even if I’m able to “be” merciful for seven days or even a year, true heart change will never come.

The truth is I cannot make myself become more merciful. Even if I participate in acts of mercy I will still have a heart that is full of wickedness. Now, you might be thinking, “What’s the issue you’re still being merciful aren’t you?” Well, the truth is there wouldn’t be an issue except for the fact that God demands obedience from the heart. Isaiah writes:

Isaiah 29:13 13 And the Lord said: "Because this people draw near with their mouth and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment taught by men…

In the same vain Luther explains:

God judges according to what is at the bottom of the heart, and for this reason, his law makes its demands on the inmost heart and cannot be satisfied with works, but rather punishes works that are done otherwise than from the bottom of the heart, as hypocrisy and lies. (xiii)

He continues:

No one can satisfy it (the law), unless all that you do is from the bottom of the heart. But such a heart is given only by God’s Spirit, who makes a man equal to the law, so that he acquires a desire for the law in his heart, and henceforth does nothing out of fear and compulsion, but everything out of a willing heart. (xiv)

Bringing this back to the Beatitudes when I hear, “Blessed are merciful,” I realize that this is not just about merciful acts; but also a merciful heart. So even if I’m merciful on the surface my heart is not. As a result, I conclude that I’m not “blessed.” Add to this the fact that to be blessed simply means to be approved by God; I now realize that my situation is rather miserable. Where does this leave me? Is there any hope?

So here I am condemned and feeling God’s disapproving glare. I’m at the end of my rope, but it’s here that a strange new hope is birthed. I come across the first Beatitude which says, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven.” I think, “Wait a second that’s me!?!” Why are the poor in spirit blessed? Because only they can receive the news that:

Romans 3:23-25 all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

I’m blessed because through knowing the condemnation of the law I’m leveled to the point of complete desperation where I can do nothing but receive God’s grace. It’s not that I became poor in spirit, rather I was made poor in spirit and in this repentance of sorts I begin to thirst from the heart after the mercy that once condemned me. Thus, the ought becomes the sought (It’s worth noting here that this only occurs through the poking, prodding, and guidance of the Holy Spirit).

From this illustration we see how the beatitudes present reality in such a way that the ought becomes the sought. Scholar Robert Guelich says it this way:

They (the beatitudes) are read and heard in the dynamic context of proclamation and response as statements of congratulations that effect what they announce. With the announcement the recipient’s identity is changed. (111)

This will become more obvious and practical in the coming weeks as we traverse through the beatitudes, but for now this is the beatitudes in a nutshell. I hope you join me in the coming weeks in journeying and discussing through these beautiful words of Jesus.

Peace,

Shawn

Guelich, Robert. “A Foundation for Understanding the Sermon on the Mount”

Holl, Karl. "the Reconstruction of Morality"

Luther, Martin. “Commentary on Romans”

The godforsaken God...

2010-01-18T10:31:00.000-05:00

In his book, "The Crucified God," Jurgen Moltmann unpacks Jesus' terrifying cry from the cross, "Mark 15:34 'Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?' which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'" For Moltmann this passage is the keystone to everything that is Christian. He writes:

All Christian Theology and Christian life is basically an answer to the question which Jesus asked as he died... Either Jesus who was abandoned by God is the end of all theology or he is the beginning of a specifically Christian, and therefore critical and liberating, theology of life. (4)

Beyond this, Moltmann's other motivation for exploring this mysterious passage is to find a theology that can speak to the tremendous suffering of the world, which in his context was the horrors of the Jewish Holocaust. Moltmann, who himself was a prisoner of war and repentant German soldier in WWII, explains:

Shattered and broken, the survivors of my generation were then returning from camps and hospitals to the lecture room. A theology which did not speak of God in the sight of the one who was abandoned and crucified would have nothing to say to us then. (1 Emphasis mine)

To unpack this passage and the theology around it Moltmann goes through some of the most difficult and heady trinitarian theology I've ever encountered. Although this is the case, his conclusion is simple, profound, and important. This is what I want to share with you today. Moltmann exclaims:

When God becomes man in Jesus of Nazareth, he not only enters into the finitude of man, but in his death on the cross also enters into the situation of man's godforsakenness. In Jesus he does not die the natural death of a finite being, but the violent death of the criminal on the cross, the death of complete abandonment by God. The suffering in the passion of Jesus is abandonment, rejection by God, his Father. God does not become a religion, so that man participates in him by corresponding religious thoughts and feelings. God does not become a law, so that man participates in him through obedience to a law. God does not become an ideal, so that man achieves community with him through constant striving. He humbles himself and takes upon himself the eternal death of the godless and the godforsaken, so that all the godless and the godforsaken can experience communion with him. (276)

In short, Jesus; God in the flesh; on the cross became godless and godforsaken so that we the deservedly godless and godforsaken may experience communion with him. It's a true echo of Saint Paul who exclaims, "2 Corinthians 5:21 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."

How did this revelation speak to Moltmann's quest to find a theology that can speak to the tremendous horrors of the Holocaust and specifically Auschwitz? He writes:

God himself hung on the gallows... If this is taken seriously, it must also be said that, like the cross of Christ, even Auschwitz is in God himself. Even Auschwitz is taken up into the grief of the Father, the surrender of the Son, and the power of the Spirit... God in Auschwitz and Auschwitz in the Crucified God--This is the basis for a real hope which both embraces and overcomes the world, and the ground for a love which is stronger than death and can sustain death. It is the ground for living with the terror of history and the end of history, and nevertheless remaining in love and meeting what comes in openness for God's future. (278)

These thoughts from Moltmann have much to say to us today. Upon reading this I couldn't help but have Haiti in the back of my head. Does Moltmann's theology hold up in the face of that suffering? Well, from my removed perspective I cannot give an answer. What I do know is that in understanding that God himself died a violent godforsaken death on the cross I may have fellowship with him in my sufferings whatever they may be. In fact, it is often in those moments of godforsakenness and suffering that I find God is paradoxically the most present. Or as the author of Hebrews simply puts it:

Hebrews 2:18 18 For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

Hebrews 4:15-16 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

Peace,

Shawn

Moltmann, Jurgen. "The Crucified God"

Luther's "Agonizing Struggle"

2010-01-14T15:38:00.000-05:00

I hope you're all doing well in the blogosphere. Sorry it's been so long since my last post. As I've said before, this whole having a baby thing is really a time and brain power suck. WHO KNEW!?! This said I'm just going to offer you some thoughts inspired by Martin Luther today.

The inspiration came from thinking about what Luther calls the "Agonizing Struggle." This struggle, in whatever form it takes, is the situation where:

Everything disappears / and I see nothing but my nothingness and destruction," in which I myself become an enemy to myself and the entire world becomes my enemy; yes, even God himself causes agony for me, in that he confronts me as the one who breaks his Word and contradicts what he himself has said. (Bayer 20-21)

In other words, to use saying from my old professor Paul Zahl, the agonizing struggle is that "big hurt" which throws you upon the mercy of God or as Luther explains, “Teaches you not only to know and understand, but also to experience how right, how sweet, how lovely, how mighty, how comforting God's word is” (Lulll 66).

This concept got me thinking that in my own life I’m always prone to think that God is only in those things that I find good, pleasant, and wonderful when in all actuality God is rather present in those things that hurt, kill, and destroy. Luther says it this way in his Heidelberg Disputation:

Although the works of man always seem attractive and good, they are nevertheless likely to be mortal sins.
Although the works of God always seem unattractive and appear evil, they are nevertheless really eternal merits.

This is because our existence here on earth is always “simul iustus et peccat” (Justified and yet a sinner) and in those deep places where sin exists God’s presence will always lance that part away and as with any lancing it hurts. This is because we, in the words of Luther, are “Really sick, but hope and are beginning to get, or be made, well” (Mueller 114-115).

I believe this is what Jesus was getting at in the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount. He exclaims:

Matthew 5:3-6 3 "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 4 "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. 5 "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. 6 "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.”

Why are Christians poor in spirit, those who mourn, meek, and those who hunger and thirst for righteousness? It is because through the agonizing struggle/big hurt of God confronting those areas (they are many and very deep rooted) that are not in accordance with his ways we are given to have a realistic view of ourselves and others. Eugene Peterson expresses this beautifully in his paraphrase of the first beatitude. He writes, “You’re blessed when you are at the end of your rope. With less of you there is more of God and his rule.” This illustrates the fact that it is only in being desperate that we have the kingdom of heaven, it is only in mourning that we are comforted, it is only in meekness that the earth is truly ours, and it is only because of the former things that we will ever hunger and thirst for righteousness. How does this all come about? It is through the agonizing struggle of us being confronted with God’s presence and his Word. As Oswald Bayer writes:

Agonizing struggle is the touchstone that shows the Word of God itself to be credible and mighty within such struggle and when opposing it. “For agonizing struggle along teaches one to take the Word of God into account.” (37)

I write this today as I’m mentally preparing to for a psychiatrist appointment in a half hour for the treatment of panic disorder/depression that I’ve been struggling with for almost a decade now. This has been my long agonizing struggle that has tormented me over the years. Many times I’ve prayed for healing, many times I’ve prayed for relief, but God continually says, “2 Corinthians 12:9 My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” And this is true. My agonizing struggle is the only reason I stand here today. This said, what’s your agonizing struggle? What’s your big hurt? What’s the thing that has continually brought you to your knees? Whatever it is, big or small; know that is where God is most likely doing his greatest work!

Peace,

Shawn

Bayer, Oswald. “Martin Luther’s Theology: a contemporary interpretation”
Lull, Timothy. “Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings”
Luther, Martin. “Commentary on Romans” trans Theodore Mueller

The Core Issue of the ELCA Decision & Saint Paul’s Response

2009-12-01T14:27:00.001-05:00

Let me start this post by saying that I really didn't want to devote another post to the conflict at Saint Paul's regarding the ELCA's decision. My two previous ones concerning it have dealt extensively with all that is involved.

This said, the other day I came across an old article in the Anglican Theological Review written by my former professor Paul Zahl that pointedly expresses just what is at stake in the blessing of unrepentant "publicly accountable life-long, monogamous, same-gender relationships." This being the case, I felt compelled to share it with you.

As some of you may know, several years ago the Episcopal Church made basically the same decision concerning human sexuality that the ELCA made this August. Zahl, who was on the losing side of the argument, published the following article as a plea for grace on the part of the victors. In it he first addresses the issue of homosexuality in theological terms and then asks for the grace to maintain those beliefs within the Episcopal Church. It is from the first part of this article that our quote comes from. In it he dynamically hits the core of just what is at stake in the debate over human sexuality. Zahl writes:

"So what is the big deal? Why do people like me stand against the Gene Robinson consecration and the blessing of same-sex unions? Why do we feel these two things are destructive of life in the Christian church? I note in passing that our struggle against them so far has been unsuccessful, failed, and demoralizing for the zeal and good conscience of our ministries. Why is the issue so important?"

"First, we believe the gay position as we hear it undermines the anthropology of the gospel. It undermines the teaching concerning the inherent sinfulness of the creature before the Creator. It wants to exempt a particular category of persons, gay men and lesbians, from original sin on the basis that they are "created" a certain way, therefore how can it be wrong? For reasons beyond our human understanding we are all created sinners: distorted, inverted, libidinal, and narcissistic. Our baggage is psychogenetic, not the sum of our deeds. The gay argument confuses creation with redemption—as in the old 1970s poster "God don't make no junk." That was a half-truth then, and it is a half-truth now. The core, universal, and seemingly impenetrable claim of the gay lobby is this: If I came into the world this way, then how can it be wrong? That claim is in opposition to the classic Christian doctrine, Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant, of the human being as being intrinsically and inherently fallen in all cases. The claim is Arminian explicitly and Pelagian implicitly."

"If the anthropology is flawed, then inevitably the soteriology is flawed. If "God don't make no junk," then what need is there for a savior? Why did Christ have to die on the cross, if the need of the human race were not rooted in our paralysis and inability to help ourselves? The result of an overly high anthropology is an overly low soteriology."

"The result of an overly low soteriology is a weak Christology. If Christ is not a savior in the full and plain sense of the word, then he did not have to be God. The whole encounter of Jesus with the Pharisees in Mark 2, when he made a connection between his divine authority and the forgiveness of sins, ceases to mean anything. High anthropology means low soteriology means inadequate Christology."

"Finally, the Trinitarian implications of the weak Christology implicit in the gay lobby's argument—become now the Episcopal Church's argument, it seems—are devastating. The Son who is no savior becomes automatically subordinate to the Father. We are quickly into Arianism and what we today call unitarianism. Now most theological liberals I know in ECUSA insist that they are Trinitarian Christians. And I believe them. But I wonder whether they have realized the implications for the whole of theology of the overly high anthropology of the arguments we have been hearing from the gay lobby and their friends. Please, think through the implications of a weakened profile of original sin." (Zahl 648-649 emphases mine)

So that's the core of the issue. Saint Paul's stance is not some homophobic, ungraceful, legalistic rant against a sinful lifestyle; but rather it's a holding firm to the very content of the Gospel itself. That's the issue: FULL STOP.

Peace,

Shawn

Zahl, P. (2004). Last signal to the Carpathia. Anglican Theological Review, 86(4), 647-652

Luther Quote

2009-11-18T16:00:00.001-05:00

This fall I've been going through the book of Romans with a group of High School students. In preparing for last week's discussion on Romans 7 I came across this insightful quote from Luther's commentary that I just have to share. The verse that he is exegeting is 7:14 which reads, "For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin." Concerning this Luther writes:

"That is the proof of a spiritual and wise man. He knows that he is carnal, and he is displeased with himself; indeed, he hates himself and praises the law of God, which he recognizes because he is spiritual. But the proof of a foolish, carnal man is this, that he regards himself as spiritual and is pleased with himself" (Muller 112).

One of the things I love about Luther is that he says things that seem completely out of line with our natural tendencies. It's natural to think that we should be pleased with ourselves if we "behave" properly. For Luther this is precisely the point where we are most lost.

This is why we need the law to constantly thrust us to Christ even after conversion. The second I believe that I've got my stuff together is when I'm most vulnerable. Is this a depressing way to look at life? I'll let Luther answer this one:

"Nor does speaking in this manner give cause for despair, but for arousing the desire to humble oneself and seek the grace of Christ... Yearning for grace wells up when recognition of sin has arisen" (Lull 56).

Lull, Timothy (Trans.) "Martin Luther's Basic Theological Writings"

Mueller, Theodore (Trans.) "Commentary on Romans"

Antinomianism and Legalism vs. the Gospel: Is it Legalistic and Ungraceful for Saint Paul’s to Leave the ELCA?

2009-11-10T14:10:00.001-05:00

This blog post is a response to a variety of questions and statements regarding Saint Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church's open criticism with the Evangelical Lutheran Church's (ELCA) decision in August. In case you're unfamiliar with the decision here is the denomination's official statement:

Resolution 1: "RESOLVED, that the ELCA commit itself to finding ways to allow congregations that choose to do so to recognize, support, and hold publicly accountable life-long, monogamous, same-gender relationships"

Resolution 2: "RESOLVED, that the ELCA commit itself to finding a way for people in such publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders of this church."

Saint Paul's, the church in which I serve, does not support this decision given its implications on Scripture and the Gospel (some of which I've outlined in a previous post: "No Law, No Gospel: Some Thoughts on the ELCA's decision"). Along with this, she has also been openly critical with this decision even going so far as requesting to withdraw from the ELCA.

Throughout this whole process Saint Paul's has remained as transparent as possible and has also offered numerous avenues for open dialogue and disagreement. From these discussions there have been several reoccurring themes of criticism that have surfaced concerning Saint Paul's response to the ELCA's decision. The two that I wish to discuss here are:

"Saint Paul's in choosing to leave the ELCA is not exhibiting the grace of Christ. Jesus showed acceptance and grace to everyone who crossed his path. Why are we focusing on this issue? Remember, 'let him who is without sin cast the first stone…'"

"Saint Paul's in disagreeing with the ELCA's stance on homosexuality is being legalistic…"

These are two serious and legitimate charges that need to be answered if Saint Paul's desires to have a clear conscience in its decisions over the next several months. This said, I would like to address these two criticisms by looking at antinomianism; legalism; and how a church rooted in the Gospel of Jesus Christ transcends them both.

From its outset Orthodox Christianity has always been accused of antinomianism. Antinomianism (lit. Anti-law-ism), which simply means any teaching that is critical; overturns; undermines; or is against the rule of law, was a branding that even followed Jesus Christ and Saint Paul around. I myself have even been accused of it from time to time. The charge almost seems appropriate for a religion that proclaims, "Romans 10:4 Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes…" or "Romans 5:20
²⁰ Now the law came in to increase the trespass."

Although on the surface it appears that Orthodox Christianity is antinomian, the truth is that Christianity is the polar opposite of this concept. In fact, Christianity tightens the law to its fullest extent. This is true of its founder Jesus Christ who says:

"Matthew 5:17-18
¹⁷ "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

"Matthew 5:48
⁴⁸ You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

It is also true of Christianity's great interpreter Saint Paul who exclaims, "Romans 7:12 the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good." It is in line with the Great Reformer Martin Luther who says, "We should understand 'Law' to mean nothing else than God's word and command, in which he directs us what to do and what not to do, and demands from us our obedience and 'work'" (Pless 115). Lastly, it is proclaimed up to the present in Orthodox Christianity (see Barth, Forde, Stott, Packer, Zahl, etc).

For Christianity the problem is not with the law, but rather with us. As Saint Paul says:

Romans 7:10-14
¹⁰ The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. ¹¹ For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. ¹² So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. ¹³ Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. ¹⁴ For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin.

In other words, because of my sinful condition the law cannot engender what it demands. If the law says, "jump," I sit. If it says, "Run," I walk. And in the words of my old Professor Paul Zahl, "If it says 'Honor your father and mother,' I move… to Portland. If it says, 'do not covet' (Romans 7:7-8), I spend all day on the home shopping channel" (35).

Because of this the law functions not as a rule of life for Christians, but rather, "Romans 3:19-20
¹⁹ … that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. ²⁰ For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin." In short, the law does not save; but rather exposes us and leaves us without excuse silent before the just judgment of God's wrath. We would be damned, if God had not made another way, but thankfully he has:

Romans 3:21-25
²¹ But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it- ²² the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: ²³ for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, ²⁴ and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, ²⁵ whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

Through the law we see the grotesque and infinite ways we've fallen short and are brought to a point of complete exasperation we're like Saint Paul we scream, "Romans 7:24
²⁴ Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?" In this sense the law condemns, or order that I may take refuge in Christ (Augustine 218).

So rather than being antinomian, Christianity upholds the law to its fullest extent and in doing so forces us to look outside ourselves for deliverance/salvation (Zahl 35). On the other hand, Christianity that deserves to be called antinomian is that which lessens the severity of or does away with the law. To this kind of religion God says:

Jeremiah 6:14-15
¹⁴ They have healed the wound of my people lightly, saying, 'Peace, peace,' when there is no peace. ¹⁵ Were they ashamed when they committed abomination? No, they were not at all ashamed; they did not know how to blush. Therefore they shall fall among those who fall; at the time that I punish them, they shall be overthrown," says the LORD.

More than this, when one abolishes the law, one eradicates our need Jesus Christ. Martin Luther writes:

Whoever abolishes the law simultaneously abolishes sin… For according to Romans 5:13, where there is no law there is no sin. And if there is no sin, then Christ died for nothing. Why should he die if there were no sin or law for which he must die? It is apparent from this that the devil's purpose in this fanaticism is not to remove the law but to remove Christ, the fulfiller of the law. (204 emphasis added)

In holding up the law to its fullest extent and offering the righteousness that comes through faith in Christ, orthodox Christianity avoids this. In eradicating God's clearly spoken law, the ELCA falls into this antinomianism.

Now that we've defined antinomianism, we shall look at legalism. In its most basic sense legalism is this: a belief that one earns God's favor or salvation through various good deeds. In legalism one makes and/or keeps oneself righteous through their own efforts. This belief than begets contempt for those who do not labor in the same way. Lastly, this then births lovelessness in that its self-advancing purposes squeeze out humility and compassion (Packer 175-176). Sadly, there have been countless examples of this throughout church history.

The great example of legalism in the Bible is the Pharisees. This religious sect was focused entirely on the externals of their actions; disregarding motives and purposes, and reducing life to mechanical rule-keeping (176). They believed that through their external adherence to the law, they would achieve God's favor. They believed that through their own efforts they would make themselves righteous. For this Jesus had no patience. In the gospel of Matthew he exclaims:

Matthew 23:27-28
²⁷ "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people's bones and all uncleanness. ²⁸ So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.

The ironic thing is that although legalists think they are fulfilling the law, in fact they are one in the same with antinomianism. This is because in order to create the illusion of adherence to the law, they must lessen the severity of the law. This, as we have seen, is at its heart antinomianism and that's why Jesus calls Pharisaical legalism "lawlessness."

One last note on legalism is that Christianity always falls into it when she loses sight of the cross of Christ. This is because as human beings our default setting is legalism and self-righteousness. We want to make ourselves right on our own terms without God, which is the essence of our sinful condition. The cross declares this an impossibility. As Luther says:

He who has not been brought low, reduced to nothing through the cross and suffering, takes credit for works and wisdom and does not give credit to God. (59)

Thus, when Christianity loses sight of the cross she falls into the illusion that she is righteous on her own terms and like the antinomians nullifies the cross of Christ (Galatians 2:20).

Along with falling into antinomianism, the ELCA has also drifted into legalism. In invalidating the law to make themselves right apart from God's judgment and justification they are like the Pharisees and countless legalists since. Because that is legalism in its simplest form: trying to make themselves right on their own terms apart from God.

With antinomianism and legalism properly defined, we must now beg the question of whether Saint Paul's is being ungraceful and legalistic in openly criticizing the ELCA for their decision. Well, as I hopefully showed above, in their theology the ELCA has fallen into both antinomianism and legalism. This being the case, the question of whether Saint Paul's is being legalistic and ungraceful must be answered with several questions. Was Jesus Christ being ungraceful and legalistic when he lambasted the Pharisees for their lawlessness? Was Jesus Christ being too strict when he said, "John 7:7
⁷ The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it that its works are evil"? Was the Apostle Paul being too stringent when concerning the legalists in Galatia he wrote, "Galatians 5:12
¹² I wish those who unsettle you would emasculate themselves!" or when regarding the antinomianism present in Corinth he exclaimed, "1 Corinthians 6:9-10 …neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, ¹⁰ nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God?" Lastly, was Martin Luther ungraceful and legalistic when he spoke up concerning the atrocities of the Catholic Church? Was he being narrow-minded when on trial he exclaimed:

I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other—my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. God help me. Amen… Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. (Bainton 144 emphasis added)

You see, if we accuse Saint Paul's of legalism concerning its open criticism of and dissention from the ELCA we must also by the same logic accuse Jesus; the Apostle Paul; Martin Luther; and countless others of the same crime. It is not legalism to openly oppose untruth, rather it's our bound duty to:

1 Timothy 6:20-21 …guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called "knowledge," ²¹ for by professing it some have swerved from the faith.

Of course if when defending and guarding the truth Saint Paul's begins to believe that in doing this she is somehow making herself more inherently righteous than others then she must be accused of legalism. If in this crisis Saint Paul's begins to berate homosexuals than she must be called ungraceful. Lastly, if Saint Paul's begins to focus on this topic at the expense of the "the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness…" than it must hear the words of Jesus, "Matthew 23:24
²⁴ You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!" Thus far by the grace of God Saint Paul's has avoided this and to continue she must evermore remain on her knees at the foot of the cross.

The Proper Way Forward

So what is the best way to navigate these troubled waters? How does Saint Paul's avoid the pitfalls of both antinomianism and legalism? The only way forward is the road to the cross. Christianity that is birthed in Golgotha is neither antinomian nor legalistic, but rather it proclaims the law to its deadliest and fullest extent; while at the same time offering the world her one and only hope. This is because of the great paradox found in the cross: it judges and redeems. On the cross when he who knew no sin became sin, we ultimately see the full wickedness of our ways (2 Corinthians 5:12). We stand judged. Luther says it this way:

The real and true work of Christ's Passion is to make man conformable to Christ, so that man's conscience is tormented by his sins in like measure as Christ was pitiably tormented in body and soul by our sins… You must get this through your head and not doubt that you are the one who is torturing Christ, for you sins have surely wrought this… (Forde 7, 8)

By forgiving sins unilaterally and unconditionally for Christ sake, God at the same unmasks our sin and unfaith (Forde 31). Because of this any church that stands before the cross must proclaim the total weight of God's law and judgment against humanity. To do anything less is to diminish the power of the cross. This is why Saint Paul's must hold its ground against the antinomianism of the ELCA.

Along with this the church must proclaim the redemptive element of the cross: i.e. the Gospel. The Gospel being that the God who is just and righteous in his judgment is also the one who loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son (Horton 81 & John 3:16). Saint Paul's must proclaim that, "1 John 4:10
¹⁰ In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins." and, "Romans 5:8 God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." Again, this is why Saint Paul's must take a stand against the antinomianism of the ELCA, because in lessening the sting of the law they are reducing our understanding of the love of God. This is because in understanding just how condemned and judged we are under the law, will we ever even begin to fathom just how much God loves us through his Son Jesus Christ. As I've said in another post:

In taking away the law, the ELCA nullifies Justification by Grace and turns it into a hallmark card rather than salvation. They are robbing those in same-gendered relationships from ever truly experiencing the grace of Christ. (Smith)

In short, our experience and understanding of Grace (God's one-way love toward humanity), will only be as strong as our understanding of how much we've fallen short.

In the end, the proper way forward depends on the proper balance of law and gospel, judgment and love, and lastly death and life. Sure this ministry may at times make us feel the sting of the law and seem un-inclusive, but without this sting we will never truly know what it means to be saved by grace.

Peace,

Shawn Smith

Augustine. Spirit and the Letter. Bainton, Roland. Here I Stand. Elert, Werner. Law and Gospel. Forde, Gerhard. On Being a Theologian of the Cross. & Justification by Faith: a matter of life and death. Horton, Michael. The Gospel-Driven Life. Luther, Martin. Heidelberg Disputation & Against the Antinomians. Packer, J.I.. Concise Theology. Pless, John. Handling the Word of Truth. Zahl, Paul. Grace in Practice.

Emil Brunner, the Holy Spirit, and Ministry: Part I of II

2009-10-21T15:32:00.001-04:00

If I were to name one of my biggest blind spots in faith besides my uncanny ability to keep sinning and a persistent fear of death, I think my understanding and faith in God the Holy Spirit rank near the top. All my life I've struggled with this mysterious entity and what he means for my life in the here and now. There have been times where I've apprehended, or should I say was apprehended upon, by a greater understanding of the Holy Spirit and other times where I have restricted my belief in the Spirit's activity because of fear or an encounter with a crazy charismatic (Crazy charismatic is not an insult to anyone who considers him/herself a charismatic, but rather someone who is by all diagnostic principles is crazy. I consider myself comfortably charismatic). So like the tides in the ocean, there are times when I'm overflowing with a faith and knowledge in the Holy Ghost and there are other times where he seems so foreign to me that I don't know how to even acknowledge him in my life.

Thankfully I am not alone in this. Throughout church history there has been an effort to constrain the Holy Spirit's mysterious power and also times when he lets himself loose on the world. There have been places where the church has committed ungodly atrocities in the Spirit's name and there have been moments when the Spirit makes himself so real to a group of people that revival spreads like wildfire.

Lately my Jedi Master Tom Schaeffer and I have been reading and discussing a powerful book by Emil Brunner called "The Misunderstanding of The Church." In this work he examines the nature of the church, which he calls the Ecclesia, and shows that, "The New Testament Ecclesia, the fellowship of Jesus Christ, is a pure communion of persons and has nothing of the character of an institution about it" (17)… How he goes on to prove this is rather provocative and will lead you to rethink the whole nature of the church. One particularly astounding chapter in Brunner's book is "the Christian Fellowship and The Holy Spirit." It is in this chapter that all of my blind spots and protective measures against the mysterious power of the Holy Spirit are exposed and I'm left wondering how he might work in my life and my ministry if he were given free reign. Because of the way this chapter moved in my life and ministry, I wish to share it with you that it might do the same.

For Brunner, "the fellowship of Jesus lives under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit; that is the secret of its life, of its communion, and of its power" (47). He writes:

"We ought to face the New Testament witness with sufficient candor to admit that in this "pneuma" (Spirit), which the Ecclesia was conscious of possessing, there lie forces of an extra-rational kind which are mostly lacking among us Christians of to-day." (48)

Brunner believes that words themselves are not sufficient to grasp the reality of the Holy Spirit, rather he is a reality which reveals itself apart from words. For this reason Brunner believes that the language of the psychology of the unconscious serves us well. He writes:

"In regard to the dynamism of human life, it is precisely this layer of the soul—only too often withdrawn from clear awareness—which is the decisive factor. Now the Holy Ghost is certainly not to be identified with the unconscious. The Holy Ghost is God: but the Ecclesia, in its experience of the Holy Spirit, experienced God as the One whose impact on human life penetrates these depths of the soul, touches these hidden energies, mobilizes and harnesses them in the service of His holy will. The Holy Ghost seizes the heart, not merely the nous: it pierces the heart until it reaches the depths of the unconscious and even the very physical constituents of personality." (48)

"The Spirit operates with overwhelming, revolutionary, transforming results. It manifests itself in such a way as to leave one wondering why and how, and in such a way as to demolish the walls of partition separating individuals from each other. Its mode of operation is such that we find ourselves forced to adopt the terminology of mysticism on the one hand, of magic on the other, since that of logic and of theology is seen to be inadequate and inappropriate." (49)

Following this Brunner explicates three phenomena of the Spirit's work. First, is the fact that the Holy Spirit is the mysterious power that makes Christian fellowship possible. From disassociated individuals it creates a unity which forms a single body. The body, for Brunner, is not a metaphor; but rather, "an effective reality of a supra-logical kind, quasi-physical, and in any even essentially organic" (49).

The second mysterious work of the Holy Spirit is the way he assigns different tasks to the individuals who constitute the body. In the same way organs have their specific functions, the Holy Spirit equips individuals to perform special services within the body. He writes:

"One thing is supremely important: that all minister… There exist in the Ecclesia a universal duty and right of service, a universal readiness to serve and at the same time the greatest possible differentiation of functions. The metaphor of the organism illuminates on aspect of the reality; the dependence of all kinds of ministration on the one Lord reveals the other." (51)

For Brunner, this organic understanding of the Ecclesia is something entirely different from that of an organization or institution. In fact, it's the exact opposite. In some of his most challenging words he explains:

"It is the mystery of the Ecclesia as the fellowship of the Spirit that it has an articulate living order without being legally organized. When we who are so accustomed to the juridical organization of the Church ask how such a 'pneumatic' order is possible, the answer must be: it is no longer a simple possibility, but it was once possible thanks to the reality of whose dynamic power we can now entertain scarcely a vague surmise—the reality of the Holy Ghost." (51)

"The organization of the church and in particular its legal administration is a compensatory measure which it becomes necessary to adopt in times and places where the plenitude of the Spirit is lacking. Canon law is a substitute for the Spirit." (51)

Simply put, for Brunner the organization and institutionalization of the church and the organic work of the Holy Spirit are incompatible. Institution only exists where an awareness of the Spirit is lacking.

The third mysterious work of the Holy Spirit for Brunner is that he is the primary factor of the fellowship of Christ's missionary work. He writes, "Outsiders were attracted—the story of Pentecost already shows us this quite plainly—not primarily by what was said, but by the element of mystery—what happened simply" (51). Brunner believes that people drew near to the Christian community because they were irresistibly attracted by its supernatural power. In short, they wanted to share in its power (52). He writes:

"There is a sort of fascination which is exercised mostly without any reference to the Word, comparable rather to the attractive force of a magnet or the spread of an infectious disease. Without knowing how it happened, one is already a carrier of the infection." (52)

"Here the mighty energies of the Spirit are more important than any word, although these energies, in so far as they are those of the Holy Spirit, owe their origin to the Word of God." (52)

"The Word of God is truly and effectively in the Church as the word of the Holy Ghost, implying therefore a unity of 'logos' and dynamic energy which lies beyond all comprehension." (53)

From this summary of the Spirit's work Brunner next goes to show that the order of fellowship springing from the Holy Spirit was one of service which flowed from true faith and revealed itself in a new relationship to ones neighbor (54). For Brunner, this order is highly opposed to the hierarchical institutionalization of the church. In fact, it is the institution that destroys the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. Brunner writes:

The delicate structure of the fellowship founded by Jesus, and anchored in the Holy Spirit, could not be replaced by an institutional organization without the whole character of the Ecclesia being fundamentally changed: the fellowship of Jesus Christ became the church. The apparent similarity between the official organization and the New Testament order of the Spirit shows upon closer inspection that at every point there has taken place a change in essential character." (54)

"Now there was dogma—without the dynamism of the Spirit-filled Word of God. Now there was faith, in the sense of correct, orthodox belief, but separated from love. Now there was community in the sense of a Church with offices, but no longer the solidarity of reciprocal service." (54)

Concluding Questions

So this is Brunner's powerful understanding of the Holy Spirit and the church. There's a lot here to agree and disagree with. Next week I'm going to share how this chapter has impacted my life and ministry, but for now I just want to leave you with some questions in the hopes of generating some discussion on this topic.

What did you agree or disagree with Brunner's understanding of the Spirit?

What would your life, relationships, and ministry look like if you were to follow Brunner's theology to its logical outcomes?

In your own ministry, whether that's pastoral or volunteer, how might things change given Brunner's description of the Spirit's work?

Lastly, how would your church have to change, given Brunner's belief that institution squelches the Spirit's work?

Labor with Mike Yaconelli

2009-10-14T12:46:00.001-04:00

For those who regularly read my blog (Jay being the only one I think), sorry it's been so long since my last post. Who knew having a baby would not only be a time suck, but also a destroyer of any reflective thinking. So with this in mind, today I'm just going to offer you a quote.

When little Isaiah was born I brought one of my favorite books with me to the hospital thinking it might act as comfort food during a rather stressful time (Don't worry, I didn't read it well she was in labor). Well, the book succeeded. I think it's always cool when you read a book for the second or third time how different things stick out. This time a particular quote about faith really moved me. So without further a due here is Mike Yaconelli's description of childlike faith:

It is hard to ask for help. Childlike faith is not for people who need a little help; it is for people who are desperate, who are at the end of their rope. Faith is for those who are not too proud to wave their arms and admit they are drowning.

Faith is not religious positive thinking. It's not a motivational course, a pep talk, an exercise in positive self-imaging. Faith is for the helpless. It is a humiliation, out of which humility is birthed. We do not come to faith to find the extra punch we need to make it over the hill. We come to faith because we are exhausted, weakened, ready to give up. Faith is more than giving up. It is giving in. (161)

These paragraphs really spoke to my soul in the hospital. Although some would disagree, labor is also hard on a guy (especially if he has panic disorder and hospitals tend to set him off). Watching your wife in such pain, the fear of the unknown, etc… Not only this, it's experiencing a life change that you have no former reference point for. It's a scary thing and at the end of the day you have a 7 pound 8 ounce milk drinking machine to contend with.

This quote just reminded me of the fact that faith was for me at that point in time. I didn't have to have my stuff together; rather the fact that I was completely helpless made me a perfect candidate for faith.

Well that's all I got for today.

Peace,

Shawn

PS: Oh yeah, here's the little man…

No Law, No Gospel: Some Thoughts on the ELCA’s Decision

2009-08-25T17:25:00.001-04:00

Hi my name is Shawn and I'm a sinner in complete need of a Savior. How do I know this? Well, two reasons. First, I have this nagging existential guilt that presents itself in the oddest of ways. Unless alleviated it robs me of any sense of wellbeing and really twists my insides into a knot. As Freud says, guilt is the, "most important problem in the evolution of culture" (Fitzsimmons 11). This guilt is a universal problem that we need release from.

The second reason I know I'm a sinner is from the Law of God. When I place myself before the standard of a Perfect Almighty Creator I'm left speechless by how much I've fallen short. When I come face to face with the law of God I discover that according to God's standard I'm a murderer whose committed adultery in his heart, and worshiped other gods on many occasions. Again if this is not alleviated I'm dead.

This is where I'm at without Jesus Christ. I am branded a sinner by my conscious, the never ending implied laws of the world and the unbendable Law of God. I have no way out. As the Apostle Paul says, "Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?" Thankfully this is where Jesus Christ comes into the picture. This is the Gospel. After crying out for deliverance Paul declares,

Romans 7:25
²⁵ Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!

Romans 8:1-3 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. ² For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. ³ For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh.

What I've just described above is the theology of "Law and Gospel." It's what Luther described as, "The highest art in Christendom, one that every person who values the name Christian ought to recognize, know and possess." In short, it is this: the Law is nothing else than God's unbending word and command that demands complete fulfillment from the bottom of the heart. The Law labels me as a condemned sinner in need of a Savior. On the other hand the Gospel bids us merely to accept the offer of grace, forgiveness of sins, the Holy Spirit, and eternal life that was provided for us through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Together Law and Gospel are two words and two ministries that God uses to bring us back to himself. Law flattens and kill me and the Gospel revives me or as the Apostle Paul states:

Galatians 2:19-20
¹⁹ For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ. ²⁰ It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Because of their unique relationship the Gospel is not "good news" without the law. In other words, no law=no Gospel. Lutheran theologian John Pless states it this way, "Only where the Law has crushed sinners does the Gospel do its gracious work of healing the broken-hearted" (44).

So what's this have to do with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's (ELCA) decision this past week? In case you're unaware, the ELCA made the decision this week to support both monogamous same sex relationships and allow those who are in such relationships to serve as ordained leaders in the church. Here's the resolution in their own words:

One of my issues with these proposals, besides the obvious disregard for the authority of Scripture, is the fact that in doing this the ELCA may be robbing those who are in same-gendered relationships the opportunity to know the grace, forgiveness, and comfort of the Gospel.

Let me explain. The Law of God declares homosexuality to be a sin (Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:8-11, & others). So just as the law declares me to be an adulterer because of my lusts, a murderer because of my anger, and an idolater because of the way I stray; the law would convict one who is homosexual of his/her sin. The sin of homosexuality is no better or no worse than my countless sinful acts, but like all sin it misses mark. Like all sin it is a bondage that we need release from (Subsequently choice is not the matter here. We are all in bondage to sin. Just how one does not "choose" to be homosexual, I did not "choose" to struggle with lust. It's a bondage I need release from. It's the law that make us conscious of our bondage to sin).

So in essence, because the ELCA lessens the sting of the law for those who practice same-gender relationships, they are in affect pushing them away from the saving Gospel of Christ. The "grace" they are wishing to offer in these resolutions is in fact opposite of grace because it pushes one away from the only true Grace that the world has ever known. Lutheran theologian Pless says it this way:

Without the prior work of the Law, the Gospel itself is perverted as it is reduced to nice words about God with sentimental appeal but completely void of forgiveness of sins. (Italics Mine 43)

Or as Luther himself says, "Who could know what and why Christ suffered for us without knowing what sin or the law is?"

The ironic thing in all of this is that in passing this resolution the presiding Bishop of the ELCA believes they are building, "on the key Lutheran principles of Justification by Grace…" But, in taking away the law, the ELCA nullifies Justification by Grace and turns it into a hallmark card rather than salvation. They are robbing those in same-gendered relationships from ever truly experiencing the grace of Christ. As Luther states:

They cannot be humble who do not recognize they are damnable whose sin smells to high heaven. Sin is recognized only through the law… Such preaching concerning sin is preparation for grace, or it is rather the recognition of sin and faith in such preaching. Yearning for grace wells up when recognition of sin has risen. (Italics Mine)

In short, No Law, No Gospel…

Peace,

Shawn Smith

Werner Elert: Law and Gospel

Allison FitzSimons: Guilt, Anger, & God

Martin Luther: The Distinction Between Law and Gospel (A Sermon), The Heidelberg Disputation, the Preface to Romans & Smalcald Articles.

John Pless: Handling the Word of Truth

Some thoughts on local stores, Walmart, and Megachurches.

2009-08-19T13:01:00.000-04:00

This is sort of an unorganized little rant, but it's just something that's been happening again and again and I just sort of felt the need to vent a bit.

Everyone knows the plight of the local store since Walmart has exploded. The local store cannot compete with Walmart's prices, selection, and 24 hour convenience and eventually closes.

I used to work for one of the big churches in Pittsburgh PA. There's nothing wrong with that. It was an awesome place, doing the work of the Kingdom in drastic ways.

Now I work for a smaller church in Maumee Oh. Not a small church by any means of the imagination, just smaller than my old church. One of the most discouraging things about ministry in this setting has been the constant critiquing of our ministry with that of the larger churches in town.

In the Toledo region Ceder Creek is one of those churches. Averaging 8,ooo per Sunday at their multiple locations, Ceder Creek (which follows the Willow Creek model) seeks to reach the unchurched.

The question is, are these churches actually reaching the unchurched, or are they really just grabbing people from other churches? The Leadership Network/Hartford Institute for Religion did a study on 12 Megachurches nationwide asking the members where they had gone to church (if any) before they started going to their megachurch. Here's the stats:

4% Have attended the Megachurch most of their lives
6% Had never attended any church (unchurched)
28% Came from another church far away
44% Came from another local church

Another interesting stat is that 80-90% of Maumee is unchurched. Yet megachurches like Cedar Creek, The Church on Strayer, etc... are continuing to grow, but the number of unchurhced never changes. Along with this, churches like mine continue to shrink. Are these megachurches reaching the unchurched or are they pulling a Walmart and slowly closing down the local church?

I believe it's the ladder. In youth ministry there is an expectation that I have to compete with these churches. I can't! I do not have the resources, money, full worship band, youth sanctuary, etc. to pull that off. My Senior Pastor often feels the same pressure. I've had countless youth and adults come up to me asking, "why can't we do this like Cedar Creek, why can't we have the cool youth room set up, etc..."

My point in this rant is this: is this really what the church is suppose to be doing? What is happening in Toledo is mirrored across every city in America. Instead of sharing the Gospel and preaching Christ Crucified, we as the church are looking more like Walmart and the nameless local stores that are closing down. It feels more like a competition than the Kingdom of God (read Acts). I for one have had enough.

I would love to know what you think?

Shawn

PS: Sorry for the angry tone here...

Predestination Part VI of VI: “Zahl’s View”

2009-08-13T14:37:00.001-04:00

If you were to take Martin Luther's "Bondage of the Will," marinate it in Sci-Fi imagery, mix it together with Tyler Perry movies, and sprinkle it with Lord of the Rings references you would end up with Paul Zahl's understanding of predestination. Although this is the case, I think Zahl (former dean of Trinity School for Ministry & Recently Retired Rector of All Saints Church) would argue that he doesn't want to offer any theology of Predestination; but rather a Theology of Everyday life. He writes:

This theology of everyday life takes its first breath from the irrepressible words, "Help me!" (103)

A theology of everyday life depends on the un-free will. If the will is free then we do not need someone to save us. (104)

Often when the subject of the un-free will comes up, people jump ahead of my claim. They think I am talking about predestination. They think I mean Pavlov and little dogs with bells and shocks. They think I am trying to corner them into some kind of idea that makes people into puppets. To this I say, "You're ahead of the game. I am talking about one thing, and one thing only: how people actually act and whether they are under compulsion in certain situations. Please don't talk to me about puppets until you have answered me about addicts" (104)

In short, any understanding Zahl gives concerning predestination is earthed in the compulsive experiences that we all have. It begins from the ground up. It is earthed in the observable fact that we often can't change ourselves, let alone save ourselves. Thus, unlike Augustine and Calvin, Zahl does not talk about conceptual predestination, but rather the mere fact that, "Human beings are not as free to act as they like to think they are" (104). Simply put, Zahl deals with the un-free will and how it relates to everyday life.

For Zahl the doctrine of the un-free will is a biblical and descriptive approach to life that for him reveals one of the most plain and hidden facts of the human world. It is plain because of experience and it is hidden because no one wishes to see it.

To build his case Zahl looks at everyday areas of compulsion that humans experience. He writes, "Think about anger. Anger can be triggered by a single word, a contemptuous gesture. People have killed each other over a single contemptuous gesture. Anger is often compulsive" (105). He next turns to look at the addict. He writes:

Addiction needs help, complete help. You have to start by putting yourself in the wrong and acknowledging that your life is out of control. (105)

The minute you begin to think they have the power they disappoint you. (106)

From addictions Zahl goes on to look at our battles with weight, mourning, depression, and worry. He then shows how all of these compulsive examples from our everyday life really confirm what Scripture already illustrates through such examples as Romans 7, Jesus coming to save sinners, and Isaiah's suffering servant.

Where the genius of Zahl's understanding of the un-free will comes into play is when he extrapolates the natural outcomes of whether one embraces free will or the un-free will. He writes, "If you believe in people's free will, you will always judge them when they "choose" wrongly" (108)… He believes that this is most poignantly seen in various sorts of Christianity encountered in the world. He writes:

Forms of Christianity that stress free will create refugees. They get into the business of judging, and especially of judging Christians. (109)

If you were to interview the millions of people who feel they left Christianity although they were brought up in it, you would find that one two-syllable word, "judgment," tops the list… (109)

It is judgment that drives people away from Christianity. Ironically, it is judgment—the absence of it—which drew people toward Jesus Christ. (109)

Again for Zahl, the idea that drives this judgment is free will, i.e. people could just change if they wanted too. To illustrate this Zahl points to the Parable of the Pharisee and the Penitent tax collector that reads:

Luke 18:10-14
¹⁰ "Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. ¹¹ The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. ¹² I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.' ¹³ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, a sinner!' ¹⁴ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted."

Here the Pharisee gives himself credit for the "smart choices" he had made in his life whereas the tax collector recognized his complete dependence on the grace of God in light of his overwhelming sins and bondage. Zahl writes:

For the tax collector, God's grace was one-way love, not a two-way operation that relied on his effort. For the Pharisee, it was semi-Palagianism all the way. And there was no compassion on the part of the Pharisee, none at all. There was self-congratulation and contempt. (111)

They (Pharisees) are Frankenstein's Monster of the "free will" (112)

This all leads Zahl to conclude that, "'Free will' creates judgment creates rejection creates flight" (110). Now, on the other end belief in the un-free will, "creates sympathy creates mercy creates comfort creates change" (110). This is because:

The moment you understand that people are not as free as they think they are, especially in sectors of compulsion, you are able to have compassion for them. You begin to "try a little tenderness." Instead of judging them for doing wrong when they should be doing right, you start developing some sympathy. (105, 106)

The relation of the un-free will to compassion is that the un-free will enables compassion. (109)

For Zahl this compassion is having mercy on people who cannot help themselves (108). It's having the mercy of God who "when we were helpless" sent, "Christ to die for the ungodly" (Romans 5:6). And lastly it's having the mercy of Christ who, "Luke 19:10 came to seek and to save the lost."

My Own Thoughts on Zahl's View

As you've probably noticed if you've read any of my blogs, Zahl has had a tremendous influence on my life and ministry. Upon entering seminary his understanding of grace blew me out of the water and led me to a greater appreciation of God's one-way love.

This said, his understanding of the un-free will was a sort of turning point for me as well. By the time I had entered seminary I had been engaged in inner city ministry for about 7 years. During that time I had encountered seemingly meaningless violence, abandoned children, grotesque addictions, broken promises, and strange religion. All of this, depending on my mood, either led me to a place of judgment, complacency, hopelessness, or hurt. This was particularly true during my time in Atlanta. Seeing lives that never changed, addictions that couldn't be conquered, and children who were closely following the violent paths of their elders led me to this open ended question: "What do we do? Who will deliver us from this tragic situation?"

A good portion of this issue was settled upon encountering Zahl's teachings. Through his understanding of the un-free will I was not only able to acknowledge the areas of compulsion in these people's lives, I was also led to acknowledge those areas in my own life and in acknowledging this I was led to a greater understanding of our need for a Savior in every aspect of our lives. Along with this, I was led to a greater understanding of the importance and power of the Holy Spirit in all this mess. It is God's work through us and his work only that brings forth change. As Zahl himself writes:

It is the Holy Spirit who brings Christ to life. He takes the "old, old story" and applies it to you point of need. (129)

A theology of grace in practice depends on the Holy Spirit of God. The heavy lifting in all human relationships comes from grace… The results of this lifting, however, depend on the Holy Spirit. (129)

Having offered to someone the one-way love of grace, the only thing you can do is pray to the Holy Spirit to take it from there. (130)

Without the Holy Spirit, we have nothing in the now. With the Holy Spirit, we can love the one-way direction of grace and trust the result. (130)

For me Zahl's interpretation of our un-free condition is a proper-pessimism which gives way to an extravagant-optimism when seen in the light of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit's work.

In closing, the reason why I chose to look at Zahl is that he really earths the conversation we've been having over the past couple months. Sure, predestination is a rather heady subject, but there are outcomes to each option. Zahl looks at the extreme consequences of embracing free will and shows some of the beneficial outcomes for believing that we are not as free as we think we are. As I hinted at before, his conclusion have led me to cling to the cross and the Holy Spirit's guidance in every situation whether personal or in ministry. As the Apostle Paul says,

Romans 7:24-25
²⁴ Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? ²⁵ Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!

Peace,

Shawn

Zahl, Paul. "Grace in Practice"

Other works by Zahl:

"Who Will Deliver Us," "A Short Systematic Theology," "The First Christian," "The Christianity Primer: 2000 Years of Amazing Grace," and several others.

For his sermons go to All Saint's website

Upcoming Blogs

2009-08-06T11:37:00.001-04:00

Wow, it's been awhile since I last posted anything. Things have been crazy busy around work and home. Anywho, I've been having some thoughts that have been jumping around in my head so this blog shall be up and running again pretty soon. Here's a little preview of the next several blogs:

Predestination VI: Paul Zahl's View
Predestination: Afterward
Practical Pelagianism and Prayer: Thoughts from Augustine on Prayer
Emil Brunner, the Church, and the Holy Spirit

Hope you enjoy.

Peace,

Shawn

Aaron Reed: Dead at the age of 18

2009-07-08T16:42:00.000-04:00

I hesitated to post this, but I just need to let feelings out. It's all part of the grieving process.

About 5 years ago I meant a 7th grade student (The one pictured far left) who would change my life forever. I had just begun working with Allegheny Center Alliance Church's (ACAC) Student Ministries in the North Side of Pittsburgh. At the time I was a lost soul still recovering from a violent and tragic ending to my ministry in inner city Atlanta. I had no idea where God wanted me.

Working with the students at ACAC was itself proving to be rather difficult. I had no idea how to relate to them what-so-ever. Me, a skinny (I know hard to imagine isn't it) white kid who loves British rock trying to minister to inner city kids. I just couldn't find a connecting point. That was until I met Aaron Reed.

My friendship with Aaron began the night I took he and his brother home from a Wednesday night program. It all started with this question, "Hey Shawn, you want to hear me rap?" I nodded yes expecting to hear some recycled garbage that you often hear on the radio, but to my surprise the words and rhythm that came out of his mouth blew me away. At that point I told them that I could make a beat and record them. Needless to say I found a point of connection with a small group of students from the North Side. It was at that point, that my ministry with ACAC truly began. Most likely, if I hadn't meant Aaron I would not be in ministry today.

In the five years since that night, friendship had made it through many valleys and mountain tops. Together, with his brother and friends, we recorded 30 songs, shared great times in our makeshift home studio, ate hundreds of McDonald's Hamburgers, played hours of laser tag, nearly blew out the subwoofer in my car, and just hung out chatting. Together, we also struggled through the death of his cousin Tony (Tone-Bone), the imprisonment of his father, the challenges of trying to stay out of trouble, the devastation of him being put in Juvi after assaulting a teacher, and the joy of being reunited after that year.

What really stuck out about Aaron during the past five years was his love. The way he would just light up when seeing me. The way he always hugged my wife and treated her so respectfully. The way he would always just say, "Shawn I can't believe you've known me for five years. You're like my brother." The way he was so excited about being an "uncle" to my baby. The way he hugged me so tight before I left to move to Ohio. And the way he would always randomly call me just to see how my life was going and of course to give me an update on his.

In fact one of those random phone calls is my last memory of him. About a month ago at 8:30 in the morning Aaron called and said, "Hey Shawn, I'm graduating High School today. You proud of me? I can't believe we've known each other for this long."

So that's a snapshot of my friendship with Aaron Reed, but sadly that's as far as it will go for now. Yesterday at 9:46pm I received a phone call from his brother telling me that Aaron had been shot in the head while walking across the Wind Gap bridge in Pittsburgh. That quickly my friend Aaron has become another statistic in the wars that wage across the country in our urban areas.

The day since that phone call has been full of emotional ups and downs. Grieving is a strange monster. One minute I'm ok and then it will hit me and I'll be sad, angry, crying, and almost shaking all at the same time. Sad at the fact that my friends life was snuffed out too soon. Angry at the fact that no matter what nothing really changes. Crying at the fact that Aaron's grandma, who raised him, doesn't even have a grandchild that has made it to the age of 18. Shaking at the waves of emotion that come with loving someone so much and knowing that you won't hear his voice again.

I write just simply asking for your prayers. For me and my wife and especially for the Reed family as they have to deal with death of yet another young male.

If I could just say one thing to Aaron (and I know in some mysterious way he knows this now) it would be this:

Aaron, God used you to change my life. It would not be the same without you. Thank you so much for the joys, laughs, challenges, and experiences you've given me. Every student I minister to benefits from the fact that I knew you.

Aaron you're with Jesus now (tell him I said hi) and all your pain and sorrow is over. I can't wait to see you in the future and hear your rhymes once again. Again brother, I'm so happy to have known you and everything I do in ministry has in some way been influenced by you.

Peace,

Shawn

I've never really been into poetry but...

2009-07-02T23:10:00.000-04:00

I was unpacking from my move and I ran into a book of poetry (The Norton Anthology of Poetry) from a class I took in undergrad. Upon finding it I started to look at a couple poems. One of them that spoke to me was a poem called "Hymn to God my God, in My Sickness" by John Donne. In it, as the title suggest, he beautifully pours out his heart to God in his sickness.

One line in particular stuck out for me. In a few words I thought it gave a great description of the Reformation concept "simul iustus et peccator" (At the same time righteous and a sinner). In it Donne gives a description of how the two Adams are present in his suffering. The first Adam being the man through whom sin entered the human race and the second Adam being Christ who healed us by his blood shed on the cross.

Here it is:

"Look, Lord, and find both Adams met in me;
As the first Adam's sweat surrounds my face,
May the last Adam's blood my soul embrace."

I just thought this was pretty cool. In few words Donne beautifully illustrates what theologians have been struggling to write describe since the Apostle Paul. It's a perfect picture of everyday life here on earth.

Peace,

Shawn

For the poem in full click here.

Predestination Part V of VI: “Whitacre’s View”

2009-07-02T16:35:00.002-04:00

We now jump from Calvin to the present by looking at Rod Whitacre's understanding of Predestination. Whitacre is Professor of Biblical Studies at Trinity School for Ministry and author of numerous books/articles including an excellent commentary on the Gospel of John and "A Partristic Greek Reader." He was also my professor a plethora of times during Seminary.
The reason I chose to look at Whitacre's understanding of Predestination is this: the man has a passion for every word of Scripture. He never intentionally places one part of Scripture against another. Thus, you can be certain that any understanding he offers on the subject is based on the complete testimony of Scripture. Because of this, Whitacre has had to deal with those places in Scripture that seem to contradict one another. It is from this that his understanding of Predestination is birthed.
He writes:

The Bible teaches two truths very clearly: divine sovereignty and human responsibility. This is an antinomy, i.e., a set of truths that seem logically inconsistent and yet both are true. Often times these two truths are juxtaposed in Scripture.

To show this Whitacre uses John 1:12. He explains:

For example, Jn. 1.12 gives the impression that human responsibility is primary: "for to as many as received Him He gave the power to become children of God." That is, first we receive and then we receive the power. But the very next verse, by itself, would say divine sovereignty is primary: "who were born not of blood nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

For Whitacre scripture is full of such antinomies (He used to say in class that it was because of such antinomies he really believed the Bible to be from God, because no one would be able to make this stuff up). This is all the more true when it comes to Predestination and because both sides are divinely inspired we must honor them both as true rather than picking extremes. To illustrate this he quotes Charles Simeon who jokes that there is not a convinced Calvinist nor a convinced Arminian who, were he sitting at the elbow of St. Paul as he wrote, would not have suggested a few changes.
To show this antimony in Scripture Whitacre examines the argument in Romans 9 & 10 (which is often used to back up a double-predestination standpoint). He writes:

Paul's argument in Rom. 10 assumes people can respond, contrary to the impression of determinism in ch. 9. In 10.13 he says, "whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved" (quoting Joel 2.32). He doesn't say, Whoever is elect will be saved. Some folk, however, think only the elect will call upon the name of the Lord and be saved. But that is not what Paul says.

Thus, concluding:

Indeed, his whole point in the rest of the chapter is that Israel has had preachers announce God's call to them and they have rejected. He concludes the section with God's statement from Isa. 65.2, "All day long I have stretched out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people." What sense would this make if God knew they could not respond because He had not chosen them to begin with?

Because of this Whitacre believes that we must be careful when examining this multifaceted subject. Thus, he writes: "I think we need to hold both sides of the antinomy, both the divine sovereignty and human responsibility."
From here Whitacre goes on to reveal his personal understanding of what Predestination is. He believes that the Scriptural meaning of "predestine" emphasizes Christians corporately and the ultimate goals God has prepared for those who are his own. He quotes Klein who writes:

Paul's concern in predestination is not how people become Christians nor who become Christians, but to describe what God has foreordained on behalf of those who are (or will be) Christians. Predestination pertains to God's causative action in marking out the present and future benefits and the priorities which accrue to those who are his children. In summary, God made prior arrangements for the present and future welfare of his own body. This is predestination. (Klein pgs. 184-185)

From here Whitacre goes on to expound his thoughts on the idea of election. He writes:

When the issue concerns God's choice for salvation, he has chosen a community—the body of Christ, the church.

Individuals find their election in being part of the elect body of Christ. To enter that body requires faith—a trust in God that involves a commitment of one's will and life to the way of Christ. The New Testament writers do not cite election as the underlying reason or cause why some individuals believe, or its lack as the explanation why others do not.

Concluding from this he writes:

So my own hunch is that election in the Bible usually refers to groups, not individuals. The only elect individual is Jesus and we are elect as we are in Him. I need to do some more work on this, but this is the view I'm working with.

Following this, Whiticre goes on to say that although Scripture teaches both divine sovereignty and human responsibility this does not mean that these two factors play a similar role in life and salvation. He writes:

Scripture is adamant that God's grace and His initiative are primary. He must act first in both creation and recreation. All is of His grace. Our response is simply to receive that which He offers, which is participation in His very Life. We receive by faith, that is, by accepting the truth about who He is and what He offers. Faith is not a work. It is the empty hands that receive.

Our response is only possible because of God's prior action. Even our capacity to receive is His gift, though it is a gift that some folks refuse. How this refusal fits with God's sovereignty is a major part of the antinomy.

My Own Thoughts on Whitacre's View
From the stand point of Scripture's testimony (depending of course on which view you take), Whitacre's understanding of predestination is pretty hard to trump. From a Biblical Theological Standpoint his argument is convincing. Also, his explication of predestination stands as a firm warning and reminder of two things. First off, Scripture's testimony is not iron clad on either side of the coin. Whitacre, whether you agree with him or not, does the best he can do with what is found in Scripture. Second, Whitacre's understanding of antimony brings to the forefront the limits of our understanding when it come to things divine. Although we like to think we have God in our pockets, the vast array of antinomies in Scripture scoff and let us know that is not the case.
I have trouble with his explanation for three reasons. First, is the fact that it leaves the door wide open for Pelagian ideas to creep in. Pelagianism, named after the heretical British Monk Pelagius who wrote in the 5^th century, believes that humanity has the capacity to do what God commands in the Law, hence the capacity to save themselves (Zahl 415). Now don't get me wrong, Whitacre would never say that, but some of his ideas give Pelagianism room to breathe. For example, Whiticare's understanding of divine sovereignty and human responsibility sounds at times like Pelagius' belief that free will and God's grace are simultaneously commended in Scripture to which Saint Augustine responds:

Now the persons who hold this opinion fail to observe that, unless our turning to God were itself God's gift… For with respect to our turning to Christ, what else does it mean than our being turned to him for believing? And yet he says: "No man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father" (448)

Because of his understanding and reliance on God's grace, Whitacre personally does not fall into the Pelagian trap. For him, as it was with Augustine, everything concerning salvation is only possible because of God's prior action, but again if it is all God's prior working anyways aren't we talking about Predestination as Augustine, Luther, and Calvin talked about? In fact, this view of God's grace is what led Augustine and the reformers to their understanding of Predestination. This is where Whitacre would fall back on the idea of antinomy. To the question of whether it is God's sovereignty or human responsibility? He would answer yes for both. As to the practical outworking of this, I believe Whitacre would leave it to the mystery of God, but in a crunch; for Whitacre; Grace trumps all.
The second thing that causes pause for me with this explanation is I cannot reconcile it with the death and slave language that is spoken of in Scripture. What I mean by this is that Scripture clearly says we are dead in are trespasses and slaves to sin and I firmly believe that dead mean dead in Scripture. For example, look at Ezekiel's valley of dry bones (Ch. 37). There was no antinomy of divine action mixed with human responsibility; it was a death to life situation: a sovereign act of God's recreation. As Paul Zahl states concerning this passage:

Grace is about life from death, or better, life to the dead. When the Spirit raises the dead men's bones to life and puts muscles on them and pumps blood into their muscles, the paradigm is not sickness and recovery. The paradigm is death and resurrection. That is the quality of grace. It responds to nothing whatsoever from our side, not a scintilla, not a sign of life, not the receptive wink of an eye. Grace is one-way love. It comes from the outside. (64)

I believe this is the obvious testimony from the New Testament as well. As Ephesians 2:4-5 puts it, "⁴ But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, ⁵ even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ- by grace you have been saved" (Italics Mine). I don't see human responsibility in play here except in its own demise.
The third and final reason why Whitacre's explanation is hard for me to grasp is that I have trouble with it from a pastoral perspective. From the end of human experience (which in this case I feel is congruent with what is found in Scripture) I believe original sin to be so evenly dispersed that the only proper response is "Save me!" If freewill/human responsibly is in play here than the cry is more of a plea for just a little help to get over this landmine. Still a deadly situation, but not insurmountable by any means.
Because of this I have trouble applying the antinomy understanding to pastoral experience. If I assume that people can meet their need than ultimately I won't offer them the pure unadulterated Gospel or I'll judge them for not making the right choice. Now I know Whitacre ultimately believes its grace alone that saves, but when I throw in the antinomy it leaves just enough room for pride to sneak in and if one accepts grace then he/she will be left open to pride and self-righteousness. "I made the choice, why couldn't my husband make the choice." Think I'm splitting hairs? I've seen this in churches that come from a more Armenian background (my old job with the Christian Missionary Alliance). As Zahl states:

If you believe in people's free will, you will always judge them when they "choose" wrongly… "Free will" creates judgment creates rejection creates flight. The un-free will creates sympathy creates mercy creates comfort creates change (108, 110).

Because of this I firmly believe that we need to approach others and ourselves with the understanding that we're not as free as we like to think we are and in doing this we can say like the Apostle Paul, "1 Corinthians 15:10
¹⁰ But by the grace of God I am what I am…"
In conclusion, this has been a tough one for me. On paper I find myself agreeing with Whitacre. Like I said before, from the standpoint of Biblical Theology his argument is almost flawless. The problem for me is what I mentioned above. Like Whitacre, I must admit that my understanding of this subject is still in process and maybe one day it will change. But as of right now when I look at the heart of Scripture, which is the gospel, I believe that we are raised from being dead in our trespasses and sins. Whatever logical conclusions that brings for predestination, well, that's what this whole series has been about.
Sorry I rambled right there. In short, I'd love to hear your thoughts on this one.
Saint Augustine. "On the Predestination of the Saints"
Whitacre, Rod. "The Antinomy in Scripture of Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility" (This used to be on the Trinity Website, but I'm sure if you email him he'll send you a copy)
Zahl, Paul. "The Christianity Primer" & "Grace in Practice"

Predestination Part IV of VI: “Calvin’s View”

2009-06-11T00:34:00.001-04:00

John Calvin is often one of the most misrepresented theologians in Church history. If you walk into most evangelical churches today bring him up you will receive an earful. J.I. Packer writes, "It is really staggering to observe how persistently, from his day to ours, Calvin and his teaching have been misrepresented and traduced" (Packer). This is all the more true when considering Calvin's doctrine of predestination. Again, walk into most evangelical churches and you will get the idea that Calvin made God into a divine chess player, destroyed human responsibility, and abolished missions of any kind. I've experienced this first hand.

This being said, upon opening Calvin's "Institutes" I was surprised to find out that much of this fear is misconceived and based on hearsay. The first thing that I noticed was that his hotly debated understanding of predestination didn't not play a central role in his theology, but was rather a piece in a puzzle, albeit a rather large piece, that helps to prove his main theological ideas. As with other reformers, the idea that God's grace plays the central role in justification by faith pushed Calvin toward the idea of predestination (Kroon 133). Calvin Says it this way:

Among those to whom it (the gospel) is preached, it does not gain the same acceptance either constantly or in equal degree. In this diversity the wonderful depth of God's judgment is made known. (920, 921 parenthesis mine).

Because of this:

It comes to pass by God's bidding that salvation is freely offered to some while others are barred from access to it, at once great and difficult questions spring up, explicable only when reverent minds regard as settled what may suitably hold concerning election and predestination. (921)

From here Calvin beautifully unpacks his beliefs of predestination and it is to this that we now turn.

In section one of chapter 21 of his famous "Institutes," Calvin right from the start makes it clear that his discussions concerning predestination (also called election) are a consequence of what has been revealed concerning salvation. He writes, "To make it clear that our salvation comes about solely from God's mere generosity—we must be called back to the course of election" (McNeill 921). In other words, any discussion of justification by faith will eventually point us towards God's unconditional election. Because of this, Calvin believes it is wrong to disbar any conversation on the topic and to do so is to, "Tear humility up by the very roots" and defraud believers, "of the blessing of their God or to accuse and scoff at the Holy Spirit for having published what it is in any way profitable to suppress. (921, 924). Although Calvin urges us to contemplate this doctrine, he sternly warns against useless speculation for mere curiosity. He writes, "If anyone with carefree assurance breaks into this place, he will not succeed in satisfying his curiosity and he will enter a labyrinth from which he can find no exit" (923). To guard from this he states that we must stay within the bounds of Scripture because, "the moment we exceed the bounds of the Word, our course is outside the pathway and in darkness" (923)… In other words, "God can only be known where he has made himself known" (Steinmetz 48). To try and find God where he has not revealed himself is true folly. Because of this Calvin attempts in his doctrine of predestination stay close to what is revealed in Scripture.

In section five of chapter 21 Calvin gives a simple definition of what predestination is. He writes:

We call predestination God's eternal decree, by which he compacted with himself what he willed to become of each man. For all are not created in equal condition; rather, eternal life is foreordained for some, eternal damnation for others. Therefore, as any man has been created to one or the other of these ends, we speak of him as predestined to life or to death. (926)

With the basic definition of predestination now stated, Calvin now proceeds to move onto how this is shown in Scripture.

He begins his survey by explicating how this is shown in God's sovereign choice to bring salvation to Israel in the Old Testament. Deuteronomy 32:8, 9 states:

⁸ When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. ⁹ But the LORD's portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage.

Calvin believes this passage shows the separation that is apparent to all humanity (927). He writes, "One people is peculiarly chosen, while the others are rejected" (927)… This can also be seen in one of Moses declarations to the people of Israel. He exclaims, "It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, ⁸ but it is because the LORD loves you" (Deuteronomy 7:7, 8)… Because of this verse and others like it, Calvin believes that it is ludicrous to deny predestination. This is because God's free election of Israel proves that one nation is not preferred above all others because of something it inherently offers, rather it is chosen because of God's free mercy and his purpose (927).

The second stage of Calvin's argument is to show how individuals were both elected and damned within Israel. He writes, "From the same race of Abraham God rejected some but showed that he kept others among his sons" (929)… This idea is most plainly revealed to us in the narrative of Jacob and Esau where God chooses Jacob over Esau in the womb. Genesis 25:23 reads, "Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger." It is because of this divine election that God can speak through Malachi saying, "Yet I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated" (1:2, 3). This illustration and others from Scripture lead Calvin to again conclude that in his mere generosity God, "has not been bound by any laws but is free, so that equal appointment of grace is not to be required of him" (929).

The argument of section six leads Calvin to state in next section that God's election is preeminently seen in his election of individual persons (Battles 258). Calvin writes:

His free election has been only half explained until we come to individual persons, to whom God not only offers salvation but so assigns it that the certainty of its effect is not in suspense or doubt. (McNeill 930)

For Calvin this can be seen in the fact that although Israel was called, few were given the "inner grace" to ascend to the head which is Christ (930). He writes, "In the members of Christ a far more excellent power of grace appears, for, engrafted to their Head, they are never cut off from salvation" (930). In other words, out of Israel whom he called, God employs a special mode of election for those who would be the Spiritual children of Abraham engrafted into the head who is Christ.

This can be seen from the fact that out of Israel God is calling and preserving a remnant for himself (931) He writes, "That adoption of Abraham's seed in common was a visible image of the greater benefit that God bestowed on some out of the many" (931). In other words, God's predestined plan was to elect not a nation, but those individuals who would be his spiritual offspring alone (931).

After this section, Calvin gives a summary and conclusion of his survey of election found in chapter 21. In this summary he concludes that through Scripture it becomes obvious that God has established by his eternal decree and unchanging plan those who he would receive salvation and those he would devote to destruction (931). He writes:

We assert that, with respect to the elect, this plan was founded upon his freely given mercy, without regard to human worth; but by his just and irreprehensible but incomprehensible judgment he has barred the door of life to those whom he has given over to damnation. (931)

Justification by faith is the sign of this eternal decree. It is by justification that God seals his elect and also shuts off the reprobate from the knowledge of his name and sanctification of his Spirit (931). Thus, through this his righteous judgment is made clear (931). Consequently by stating this, Calvin ingeniously confirms his thesis given in section one where he writes:

Among those to whom it is preached, it does not gain the same acceptance either constantly or in equal degree. In this diversity the wonderful depth of God's judgment is made known. (920, 921).

How is this so? It is because Justification is the sign that God uses to seal his elect and judge the reprobate (931).

My Own Personal Views on Calvin's View

As I mentioned in previous blogs, upon beginning to work out the doctrine of justification by faith, which I feel is one of the most obvious themes found in Scripture, predestination became something I had to deal with. If we are totally depraved and are only saved by God's gracious initiative then I do not see how one cannot hold the doctrine of predestination. Anytime we bring something to the equation whether that's through God's foreknowledge that we would be righteous if given the gift of salvation or the antinomy of the divine and human will working together the doctrine of justification by faith falls apart. As Ephesians 2:8, 9 states, "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not of your own doing; it is a gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast" (Italics mine). If we add anything to the equation, these verses fall apart and if this is true nobody can be saved because we all fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:10, 11).

As much as I try to escape what is at times a terrifying doctrine, I am always pulled back to it by the conviction that my salvation is based on the gracious initiative of God. For this reason I am able at time to embrace the positive side of this doctrine. By positive I mean the fact that our salvation is dependent upon God's gracious initiative. When that line of conversation leads to the idea of election I will gladly go there within the bounds of Scripture. Thus, I can follow Calvin this far.

Where I cannot go yet is the negative side. Calvin writes, "Election itself could not stand except as set over against reprobation" (McNeill 947). Simply put, if some are saved only by the gracious election of God, it must follow that some are created for everlasting destruction in hell. Although this is the logical outworking of the doctrine of election, I cannot go all the way. Although I believe that in not accepting this, the doctrine might fall apart, I still cannot go all the way. In his "Institutes", Calvin offers a worthy argument concerning the validity of this part of the doctrine. He writes that when we disagree with this we are judging with a human ethic which God cannot be judged by. He exclaims, "God's will is so much the highest rule of righteousness that whatever he wills, by the very fact that he wills it, must be considered righteous" (949). In other words, if God for his good pleasure thought it was right to destine some for destruction that means it is righteous (Kroon 135). This train of thought is in accordance with parts of Scripture (Romans 9:21-23 for example). Although this is the case, I still cannot embrace it in full and/or reconcile this side of the doctrine with the full revelation of Scripture. Put Calvin's logic concerning the creation of those damned for destruction next to John 3:16 and it cannot stand no matter what hermeneutical acrobatics Calvin does. Because of this, I stand with Martin Luther who was unable to go as far as Calvin did with the doctrine because he felt that Scripture is not entirely clear on this subject (Zahl 232). In the end, I rest in the fact that God is good and also his revelation to Isaiah which reads, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher then you ways and my thoughts higher than yours" (55:8, 9). I believe that this half of the doctrine is in the realm of the hidden mysterious nature of God.

As always I'd love to hear your thoughts on the subject…

Battles, Ford. "Analysis of the Inistitures of the Christian Religion of John Calvin."

Calvin, John. "Institutes of Christian Religion volumes I & II."

Klooster, Fred. Calvin's Doctrine of Predestination.

Kroon, Marijn de. The Honour of God and Human Salvation: A contribution to an understanding of Calvin's theology according to his Institutes.

Packer, J.I.. "Calvin the Theologian." Churchman 073/3 (1959). http://www.churchsociety.org/churchman/documents/Cman_073_3_Packer.pdf

Zahl, Paul. "The Christianity Primer."

Predestination Part III or VI: “Luther’s View”

2009-06-08T17:51:00.001-04:00

Where Augustine's understanding of predestination was shaped by his refutation of the teachings of Pelagius, Martin Luther's theology of predestination was sharpened in response to the writings of Catholic humanist Desiderius Erasmus. In the fear that Luther's teachings on freewill would abandon, "the Gospel to the passions of men," Erasmus penned "Discussions, or Collation, Concerning Free Will" (Packer & Johnston 37).

In short, what Erasmus feared was that in teaching about the un-free will Luther was in essence completely abolishing ethics, church law, and the entire organization of life. As Steven Paulson humorously states, Erasmus believed that without freewill and law, "average people would just disregard God's moral precepts and go wild like college kids on spring break" (112). Because of this fear, Erasmus' work presented his understanding of freewill. Simply put, he believed that humans on their own free volition can achieve salvation. Erasmus writes, "We should strive with all our might, resort to the healing balm of penitence, and try by all means to compass the mercy of God" (Luther 75). Notice in this quote that all the effort to secure God's mercy (which really isn't mercy at all in this case) comes from our end through striving and penitence. It's no wonder that in response to this statement Luther wrote, "These Christ-less, Spirit-less words of yours are chillier than very ice" (75)...

It was in response Erasmus' work that Luther published "The Bondage of the Will." Known by many as the Luther greatest writing, in it we meet "Dr. Luther, the systematic theologian, and one of a high order" (Packer 45). In this work Luther systematically lambastes every thesis in Erasmus' book from the preface to conclusion. It is here that Luther reveals the crucial issue between him and Erasmus'. He writes:

The hinge on which our discussion turns, the crucial issue between us; our aim is, simply, to investigate what ability 'freewill' has, in what respect it is the subject of Divine action and how it stands related to the grace of God. If we know nothing of these things, we shall know nothing whatsoever of Christianity, and shall be in worse case than any people on earth! (78)

Following his refutation of Erasmus, Luther sets out to positively state the Biblical Doctrine of the Bondage of the Will. It is this part of his work that I want to focus on in this post.

In the end of "The Bondage of the Will" Luther summarizes his argument as to why he does not believe in freewill when it comes to the things of God. First off:

If we believe it to be true that God foreknows and foreordains all things; that he cannot be deceived or obstructed in his foreknowledge and predestination; and that nothing happens but at his will; then, on reason's own testimony, there can be no 'free-will' in man, or angel, or in any creature. (317)

For Luther, we cannot know what freewill is until we know what ability man's will has (which we shall look at in a bit) compared to God's. Luther believed it was really the comparison of the immutable (not changing or not able to be changed) will of God vs. the impotence of our corrupt will (Luther 81). Luther writes:

He (God) foresees, purposes, and does all things according to his own immutable, eternal, and infallible will. This bombshell knocks 'free-will' flat, and utterly shatters it. (80)

Simply put the will of God is effective and cannot be impeded or thwarted. For Luther, to lack this knowledge is to be ignorant of the God revealed in the Bible. He writes:

If you hesitate to believe, or are too proud to acknowledge, that God foreknows and wills all things… how can you believe and rely on his promises… you will be accounting him neither true nor faithful, which is unbelief and the height of irreverence, and a denial of the most high God! (83, 84)

He goes on:

For the Christian's chief and only comfort in every adversity lies in knowing that God does not lie, but brings all thing to pass immutably, and that his will cannot be resisted, altered, or impeded. (84)

Luther believed that these facts alone were enough to deflate Erasmus' arguments on freewill, but for the sake of laying out Scripture's full testimony on the subject he goes further.

The second reason why Luther does not believe in freewill when it comes to matters of salvation is that if Christians believe:

that Satan is the prince of this world ever ensnarling and opposing the kingdom of Christ with all his strength, and that he does not let his prisoners go unless he is driven out by the power of the Divine Spirit, it is again apparent that there can be no 'free-will.' (317)

Concerning Satan, contemporary Luther influenced theologian Paul Zahl writes, "In the anthropology of everyday life… things are dire and very bad; but the truth is, things are worse than they appear" (102). I think Luther would agree with this statement. He believed that humanity was impotent in their strivings for God, but the truth is there is something behind the scenes orchestrating this symphony of human malfunction. As the apostle Paul writes:

Ephesians 6:12
¹² For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

For Luther this simple fact, the existence of Satan which can only be conquered by the Grace of God through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, was sufficient to show that in the end freewill has no power.

The third reason why Luther believed that freewill was a myth is due to Scriptures understanding of the human condition. He writes:

If we believe that original sin has ruined us to such an extent that even in the godly, who are led by the Spirit, it causes abundance of trouble by striving against good, it is clear that in a man who lacks the Spirit nothing is left that can turn itself into good, but only to evil. (317)

As G.K. Chesterton said some 500 years after Luther, original sin, "is the only part of Christian theology which can really be proved." For Luther, the corrupt nature of the human will is one of the most obvious facts from Scripture and everyday life. This is where his understanding of the un-free will is most clear. Luther shows that Scripture reveals the fact that even in the most noblest of men freewill, "does not possess and cannot effect anything, but does not even know what is righteous in God's sight" (275). This idea comes from the fact that in the Bible the gospel is described as a righteousness from God apart from humanity and which humanity does not know (Romans 1:17
¹⁷ For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, "The righteous shall live by faith."). Therefore, "Even in the most excellent men, however endowed with law, righteousness, wisdom and all virtues, 'free-will', their most excellent part, is nonetheless ungodly, and unrighteous, and merits God's wrath" (275). Luther goes on to say:

The facts of experience support this conclusion. Show me out of the whole race of mortal men one, albeit the most holy and righteous of them all, to whose mind it ever occurred that the way to righteousness and salvation was simply to believe on Him who is both God and man, who died for men's sins, and was raised, and is set at the right hand of the Father! (276)

Therefore Luther concludes that, "'free-will' is nothing but the greatest enemy of righteousness and man's salvation" (276). This is because by exalting free will humanity wages, "war against grace" (276).

Ultimately, this is all true because of the "universal dominion of sin" in humankind. Going off of Romans 3 ("No one is righteous…"), Luther expounds his thoughts and then wraps it up in a tidy conclusion. Simply put:

God looks down from heaven, and does not see even one who attempts to seek after him. Whence it follows that power to attempt or purpose to seek after him is nowhere to be found; but all men instead go out of the way… Paul's whole aim is to make grace necessary to all men, and if they could initiate something by themselves, they would not need grace. As it is, however, they need grace, just because they cannot do this. (281)

The final and most important reason why Luther believed that the human will is un-free is simply due to the work of Christ. He writes:

If we believe that Christ redeemed men by his blood, we are forced to confess that all man was lost; otherwise, we make Christ either wholly superfluous, or else the redeemer of the least valuable part of man only; which is blasphemy, and sacrilege. (318)

In this strong statement Luther is merely echoing the Apostle Paul who says, "Galatians 2:21
²¹ I do not nullify the grace of God, for if justification were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose." For Luther to say that humanity's freewill plays a part in salvation we are denying Christ his role as physician and redeemer for, "what need is there of light and life, where light and life exist already" (308). Simply put, if I am able to save myself then what need is there for a Savior.

My Own Thoughts on Luther's View

As I said in Part I of this series, I find myself agreeing with Luther the most when it comes to the topic of predestination. For sake of brevity (because I've already written too much) I just want to list three short reasons. First, in his explication of this matter Luther stays with Scripture and goes no further. Unlike Augustine and Calvin who veer off into come uncharted territory, Luther sticks with the testimony of Scripture only even when logic can easily take the next step. If God hasn't revealed in Scripture, Luther does not try and figure it out, but rather leaves it to the mysterious "hiddeness" of God.

Second, for Luther the work of Christ is always central. Enough said…

Third, Luther calls a "spade a spade" and yet still believes in a good God. What I mean by this is that Luther acknowledges the dark character of this subject and yet is still able to affirm God's justice and goodness. He writes:

Inasmuch as he is the one true God, wholly incomprehensible and inaccessible to man's understanding, it is reasonable, indeed inevitable, that his justice also should be incomprehensible. (315)

Behold! God governs the external affairs of the world in such a way that, if you regard and follow the judgment of human reason, you are forced to say, either there is no God, or that God is unjust… (315)

Yet all this, which looks so much like injustice of God… is most easily cleared up by the light of the gospel and the knowledge of grace, which teaches us that though the wicked flourish in their bodies, yet they perish in their souls. And a summary explanation of this whole inexplicable problem is found in a single little word: There is a life after this life; and all that is not punish and repaid here will be punished and repaid there; for this life is nothing more than a precursor, or rather, a beginning, of the life that is to come.

If, now, this problem, which was debated in every age but never solved, is swept away and settled so easily by the light of the gospel, which now shines only in the Word and to faith, how do you think it will be when the light of the Word and faith shall cease, and the real facts, and the Majesty of God, shall be revealed as they are?

In short, the doctrine of the un-free will and predestination may seem unjust now, but in the light of eternity when we see God face to face the problem shall just simply fade away. In the mean time we must rest in and proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ (the story of God's one-way love toward humanity) and not flinch at these difficulties. Simply put, we must at all times cling to the love of God as revealed through Christ on the cross.

Luther, Martin. "The Bondage of the Will"

Paulson, Steven. "Luther for Armchair Theologians"

Zahl, Paul. "Grace in Practice: a Theology of Everyday Life"

Predestination Delay...

2009-05-27T23:50:00.000-04:00

Sorry it's been so long. It's a crazy time right now @ St. Paul's. I'm hoping to get part III up with in the next week.

Predestination: Part II of VI “Saint Augustine’s View”

2009-05-13T13:17:00.001-04:00

To understand Augustine's (354-430 AD) view of predestination we must first look at his view on Grace. For Augustine, Grace is God's generous and quite unmerited attention to humanity. Because of original sin Augustine believed humanity as a whole to be frail, weak, and lost; a mass perdition of fallen individuals who cannot help themselves. Because of this we are totally dependent on God for faith from beginning to end (Augustine Ch. 51). According to Augustine it is only because of God's gracious intervention that we have any chance of being healed from original sin.

So simply put, Augustine believed that Grace is a gift and not a reward. If grace were a reward than humans could purchase their own salvation through good works, but for Augustine this would run contrary to the New Testament proclamation of Grace (McGrath 465).

It is from Augustine's radical understanding of Grace that his understanding of predestination surfaces. As I have already said Augustine believed that Grace only remains grace if it is a gift. If it is not a gift than it ceases to be a gift, but rather it is a reward for our merit. But it is obvious from human experience that this gift is not received by all (Keep in mind that he believed the faith to receive such a gift is a gift itself). Thus, Augustine believed that the faith God must be free to give or to withhold grace according to his sovereign will, thus entailing a particularity to grace, rather than a universality (McGrath). This is where Augustine's view of predestination is birthed. He writes:

"This is the predestination of the saints,--nothing else; to wit, the foreknowledge and the preparation of God's kindnesses, whereby they are most certainly delivered, whoever they are that are delivered." (Augustine Ch. 35)

In other words, according to Augustine, predestination is the way God sovereignly chooses who he will rescue from the mass perdition of fallen humanity. God does this by giving some the divine gift whereby they are moved to faith.

It is important to note that, unlike some of the later reformers, Augustine believed that God actively selects some from fallen humanity, but does not actively condemn to damnation those who were not. It rather just their natural path. However, as his critics pointed out, a decision to redeem some was equally a decision not to redeem others (McGrath 466).

One last aspect I want to look at of Augustine's view of predestination is his pastoral concerns. For Augustine predestination must be preached. Here's why in his own words:

"For either predestination must be preached, in the way and degree in which the Holy Scripture plainly declares it, so that in the predestinated the gifts and calling of God may be without repentance; or it must be avowed that God's grace is given according to our own merits." (Augustine Ch. 41)

"Grace precedes faith; otherwise, if faith precedes grace, beyond a doubt will also precedes it, because there cannot be faith without will." (Augustine Ch. 41)

In short, Augustine believed that predestination must be preached because without it we will believe that faith is our own work and thus salvation is our by merit rather than grace. By preaching predestination a person's:

"Love rejoices, and he is not as puffed up as if he had not received it. Not only therefore, is he not hindered from this work by the preaching of predestination, but he is even assisted to it, so that although he glories he may glory in the Lord." (Augustine Ch. 41)

Thus, Augustine concludes:

"Predestination must be preached,--that God's true grace, that is, the grace which is not given according to our merits, may be maintained with insuperable defense." (Augustine Ch. 54)

My Own Thoughts on Augustine's View

After diving deeply into Augustine's view there is not much here that I disagree with other than some nitpicky stuff, particularly his idea of God actively choosing some while passively letting others suffer. I'm in the same boat as his critics believing that a decision to redeem some is equally a decision not to redeem others. Whether or not you agree with this at all, it is an obvious flaw in Augustine's logic (I'm not saying that I believe in double-predestination, rather I'm just pointing out a flaw in Augustine's logic). As Calvin wisely put it, any decision of God is an active decision.

This said, what I appreciate most about Augustine's treatment of predestination is his pastoral concerns. As stated above, Augustine believed that predestination must be preached because without it humanity will naturally assume that salvation is in its own hands. This is because whenever you let any bit of human decision come into the realm Grace ceases to be a gift, but rather a reward for even the littlest thing we do. This little thing that we do eventually becomes a big thing as we look at the rest of humanity that didn't have the wisdom to make the decision we made and thus we begin to become puffed up and self-righteous. Thus, Augustine believed that in preaching predestination we deflate ourselves and give glory to God.

This idea is important for me as I continue to grapple with this multifaceted subject. At times not being sure where I find myself in my understanding of predestination I still can't get past this little issue. If salvation isn't all God's work, i.e. predestination, is it still by grace (Ephesians 2:8-9
⁸ For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, ⁹ not a result of works, so that no one may boast.)? Can you preach salvation by Grace alone and yet reconcile it with a view that doesn't eventually become predestination? These questions will be explored more deeply as we get further into the series (particularly Rod Whitacre's and Paul Zahl's thoughts on the subject), but they still worth ruminating on in the here and now. I'd love to hear your thoughts on Augustine and these questions.

Peace,

Shawn

Saint Augustine. "On the Predestination of the Saints"

McGrath, Alister. "Christian Theology: an Introduction"

Predestination: Part I in a VI Part Series

2009-05-07T14:44:00.001-04:00

One of the High School students from my youth group recently posted a note on Facebook concerning predestination and it has generated abundant conversation amongst the students on her friend list. This has inspired me to begin a blog series on the subject.

The reason predestination keeps on coming up in our youth group discussions is this: if you believe, preach, and, teach grace you're going to eventually have to deal with predestination no matter what the outcome. Think about it, if you believe that we are saved by grace alone (Eph 2:5) don't the following questions begin to arise:

"Why does God work in one way but not in another?"

"Why does he work in some people's lives but no in the lives of others?"

"He must have his reasons!"

This is where we are forced to deal with predestination (Zahl 96).

In his book, 2000 years of Amazing Grace, my old professor Paul Zahl writes:

"Predestination is the ultimate hot potato in the history of Christian theology. Nothing is able to divide a church—to divide friends and neighbors in faith from one another—like the concept of predestination… Whole churches and sects have been founded according to what a particular teacher or minister had to say about predestination" (94).

In one of his other books, Grace in Practice, Zahl also said that even the mere mention of this subject at a social function was enough to give him, "all the elbow room in the world" (95).

This being said, for reasons that I will discuss later in the series, I believe that predestination is something that any Christian who believes in salvation by grace alone has to grapple with at some point in his/her life. I personally began to grapple with this subject in my early 20s when I really started diving into the Bible. Dealing with passages particularly from the gospel of John and the epistles of Paul really prompted me to beg the question. Here are some examples:

John 1:12-13
¹² But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God. ¹³ who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. (There is an antinomy at work here, but will get to that later)

John 6:44
⁴⁴ No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.

Romans 9:15-23 ¹⁵ For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." ¹⁶ So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. ¹⁷ For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." ¹⁸ So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. ¹⁹ You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" ²⁰ But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" ²¹ Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honored use and another for dishonorable use? ²² What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, ²³ in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory…

Romans 11:5-8
⁵ So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. ⁶ But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace. ⁷ What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, ⁸ as it is written, "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day."

There are many others passages from Paul's epistles not to mention the rest of the New Testament and the Old that seem to support the idea of predestination, but to sight the all right now would be too much. Even from the small sampling of Scriptures above, the sovereignty of God is something that demands we look at this doctrine.

This being the case I would like to spend my next six posts doing a series on predestination with the goal of generating some. As you probably can tell by reading any other blogs I've done I'm coming from a reformed and mainly Lutheran slant when it comes to theology and my understanding of predestination is no exception. I've read the other views and I feel that Luther adequately described predestination without going too far. Because of my initial bias, I hope to receive some input from other backgrounds such as Catholic, Methodist, Baptists, etc… with views that are different than mine.

To do all of this these next six post are going to explore predestination through the eyes of five different theologians. In the first three posts we're going to looking at the biggies: Saint Augustine, Martin Luther, and John Calvin. The two following posts will be focusing on contemporary scholars Rod Whitacre and Paul F.M. Zahl's understandings of predestination and its implications. Lastly, the final post shall just be my own personal thoughts on the subject.

By way of avoiding confusion, the basic definition of predestination that we're working with here (and it is by no means the only right one) is pretty much this (this is the beginning of Augustine's view): "If grace is a gift, God must be free to offer it, or not to offer it, on the basis of any external consideration. If it is offered on the basis of any such consideration, it is no longer a gift—it is a reward for a specific action or attitude" (McGrath 466). For Augustine and the reformers grace only remains gracious if it is nothing more and nothing less than a gift (466). Thus, this obviously spurns the question, why do some receive the gift and some don't. This is the question that theologians have been wrestling with for 2000 years and it is this that I want to discuss over the next several weeks.

I want to finish this post with note of warning from John Calvin concerning investigation into this multifaceted subject. He writes that when we inquire into predestination we are:

Penetrating the sacred precincts of divine wisdom. If anyone with carefree assurance breaks into this place, he will not succeed in satisfying his curiosity and he will enter a labyrinth from which he can find no exit. For it is not right for man unrestrainedly to search out things that the Lord has willed to be hid in himself, and to unfold from eternity itself the sublimest wisdom, which he would have us revere but not understand that through this also he should fill us with wonder. He has set forth by his Word the secretes of his will that he has decided to reveal to us. These he decided to reveal in so far as he foresaw that they would concern us and benefit us.

In short, we must approach this mystery in awe and wonder staying close at all times to the revealed word of God in Scripture and the interpretations that have been handed down to us by the Church.

I hope this series blesses you or at least gets you thinking a bit.

Peace,

Shawn

Calvin, John. The Institutes of the Christian Religion Vol. 2

McGrath, Alister. Christian Theology: an Introduction

Zahl, Paul. Christianity Primer: 2000 Years of Amazing Grace & Grace in Practice

Something New

2009-05-05T15:01:00.000-04:00

Because it’s been awhile since I wrote anything new on the blog, I thought I would share the text of my Maundy Thursday sermon with you. The message was on the New Covenant, so I used this sermon to talk about the quintessential new thing that the covenant brought. So with that in mind I hope you enjoy:

Sermon Text: Jeremiah 31:31-34 31 "Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."

When I was immature and in high school one of the things me and my friends would do is go to neighborhoods with cul-de-sacs and then proceed to drive around and around and around the cul-de-sac until people would come out of their house and notice. Sometimes we’d even lay on the horn. I really think if I had me in my youth group I wouldn’t like me. So why do I bring up this story today? The reason is that when I began to think of the term New Covenant and how it is relevant for our lives, the image of a cul-de-sac became impressed upon my mind. This is because so often life is like driving around a cul-de-sac again and again and again. Now thinking to deeply about this will get you depressed, but if anyone takes a good honest look at life very often things don’t change by themselves. Really, think about it. Many of the things I deal with now whether that’s sin or struggles with life are really the same things appearing in a different outfit. Think about your own life. Your conflicts with your spouse or your parents. Don’t they often just revolve around the same two issues? Or how about work? Isn’t there often just one or two things that always tee you off no matter where you happen to be working?

Scripture is rather honest about this aspect of life. Just listen to the writer of Ecclesiastes:

1:2-9 2 "Meaningless! Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless." 3 What does man gain from all his labor at which he toils under the sun? 4 Generations come and generations go, but the earth remains forever…
8 All things are wearisome, more than one can say. The eye never has enough of seeing, nor the ear its fill of hearing. 9 What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

For those of you who have have read the Old Testament sometime in your life you know that the history of Israel as recounted in the OT is like one big cul-de-sac. The cycle goes from God’s command to rebellion, to catastrophe, to command again, etc, etc… This is life in the same old same old. It is also life in what the Scripture calls the Old Covenant.

Now the Old Covenant that Jeremiah is referring to is simply God’s working through his people from Moses until Christ. It was a covenant that the people broke with their cul-de-sac lifestyles. Because of this never ending cycle of failure, Jeremiah says God will make a New Covenant with his people. It is this new element to the covenant that I want to focus in on today. You see under the Old Covenant God revealed himself, but life continued to go on the same way. If anything it even seemed to get worse. Given the divine demand the people of Israel seemed to become more unrighteous than their pagan neighbors. This being the case, unless the New Covenant i.e. Jesus brings something actually new to the world than we might as well disregard it because nothing short will fail to release us from our bondage to a cul-de-sac life. So what about the New sets it apart from the Old? Why was the Old even needed, if it was going to be about the New anyway?

To answer these questions I want to use a passage from 2 Corinthians 3:5 & 6 as our launching off point. It reads, “…our sufficiency is from God, 6 who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.” From this passage it can be said that the difference between the Old and New covenants is the difference between death and life. In other words, God worked in the Old Covenant, i.e. the letter/the law to bring death and he works in the New, i.e. Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, to bring life. Although this seems a bit confusing now, it will make sense in a bit. This passage reveals to us two fundamentally different ways God works to bring about his purposes: Law & Gospel. When God speaks a word of Law, which is any form of command, it threatens sinners with divine punishment, delivers wrath, brings death, and condemnation. When God speaks a word of Gospel it promises grace to the undeserving sinner through forgiveness of sins, life abundant, and salvation. Law & Gospel could also be phrased Judgment and love, or condemnation and grace. Anyway you state it these are God’s two words and they have different ministries.

So what does this have to do with the Old & New Covenants? Well, in the Old God often worked through law. Although there is gospel in the Old Testament, God primarily reveals himself through law. In the New Covenant God primarily works through Gospel. This is why the apostle Paul can say that through the Old Covenant the letter brought death and through the New the Spirit brings life. So why did God work this way and what does it have to do freeing us from our own cul-de-sac lives?

Well, to show this I have a poorly constructed work of art. Because I’m a visual person I always need to draw things out so here it goes. Often when we think about matters of our relationship with God we think about it in terms of a ladder. We think that Jesus Christ came to give us a little help. A ladder if you will to reach God. Under this sort of system the understanding of Old & New Covenant and Law & Gospel make no sense. From this point of view we just need a little help. Interestingly enough this is the view point other religions approach God. Through good effort or Karma or whatever we can achieve access to the divine. When Christianity slips off its moorings it also often presents this kind of picture. Scripture though paints a much more desperate situation and it is under this situation that the necessity of the something new in the New Covenant becomes life changing.

The next slide reveals what our situation really is. As you can see this is a pictorial representation of our situation as described in Eph 2:1-3. You might say to yourself, “I’ve never said those things to God!?!” But the truth is we all have, whether it’s through our actions or inner desires. The situation presented in this slide is a closed circle without God’s intervening. Now imagine if God would offer this person the New Covenant i.e. Gospel. He would flat out say that he doesn’t need it. He does not feel his death. He doesn’t know his bondage. He is spinning around in a cul-de-sac and doesn’t even know it.

This is where the law comes in. The law was not given under the Old Covenant as a mere instruction manual, rather it was given so that sin might be elevated to such a level that everyone would have knowledge of their sins and be held accountable to God. The hope being that in such a helpless situation we might to turn to him who can save us from our sin. In short, the law was given to make us hit our rock bottom. It was given to kill! This is what the next slide reveals.

This is the cul-de-sac situation that the Old Covenant and the Law leave us in. Desperate with no way out unless through suicide or a Savior. Thankfully God gives us a Savior. This is shown on the next slide. Here is the fundamentally New thing that God brings to us through the New Covenant & Gospel: “Romans 5:8 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” In other words, the New thing in the New Covenant is the Gospel message. God came into the world to save sinners. God approaches us. For God so loved the world. Even while we were in the midst of our junk.

In the next slide we get a glimpse of what our present situation is. This is the New Covenant reality. This is the gospel reality. God worked in two distinctive ways to make this a reality. Through the Old Covenant and the law God brings us to a place where there is no way out. In short, he brings us face to face with the way things are and we die. When this hits us we call out to Christ and he himself becomes the curse for us. This leaves us at our present situation in the New Covenant. The curse of the law is done away with. As Paul says, “Romans 10:4 Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.” In other words, the law that was written on tablets of stone has done its job by bringing us to Christ and as Jeremiah says we have the law inscribed on our hearts through the Holy Spirit. So where terror from the law was imposed by the old covenant, the New brings delight inspired from the inside out by the gospel, a grateful heart, and the Holy Spirit. And although sin, the flesh, the world, and Satan (although bound) still attempt to exert control over us; this happens in the context of this new reality which is not a never ending cul-de-sac of hopelessness, but rather something new and full of hope. For the present these two realities exist simultaneously, but we have the hope of knowing that he who saved us will bring his good work to completion.

Now there is so much more that could be said about all of this and that’s one of the joys of the Christian life is discovering all the things that God has made available to you, but for our purposes we must now look at what this something New speaks to our present lives. Again there are an infinite number of ways this could speak to our present lives, but I want to zero in on three new things that the New Covenant brings to the table. First, The New Covenant reveals a God who approaches sinner. He doesn’t wait for us to make the first move, he himself takes the lead. Roman’s says it perfectly, “Romans 5:6 6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.” This is something fundamentally new the Jesus brought on the scene. Any other religion, any other world view expects something from the weak, Christianity expects nothing.

The second New thing that the New Covenant brings is unconditional forgiveness. You see God doesn’t come to us sinners empty handed; he comes baring unconditional forgiveness through the death and resurrection of his Son. This is something fundamentally new to the world! It’s not forgiveness in hopes of what we might become, rather it’s an unconditional closed door on our past and anything we might do in the present and future. In the context of the work of Christ we can trust that this forgiveness is as real as the air we breathe. This is why Pastor Paul can declare to you forgiveness of sins.

The third new things is that because God approaches us bringing with him forgiveness, the hope of true repentance and restored relationship with God is actually possible. Again, any other religion and worldview expects something out of the receiver. Christianity turns this notion on its head. Through Jesus God takes the initiative and with unconditional forgiveness creates something new. In the context of Grace we have the confidence that our repentance, i.e. our sorry, will be heard and our past, present, and future will be unconditionally forgiven. This New Covenant, this gospel creates the ultimate possibility for a warm relationship with God and a transformed life. A life that is not of the cul-de-sac, but rather freedom!

You wanna see this in action? Just read the gospels. Without fail every time Jesus approaches a sinner their lives are changed. Whether that’s the disciples, Zacchaeus the tax collector, the Samaritan woman at the well, the woman caught in adultery, or the woman who poured out the perfume on Jesus’ feet; when Jesus approached them they were completely transformed. Why? Because in Jesus Christ God was coming to them with something New and that something New was unconditional forgiveness. For these lowly sinners like you and me this pardoning grace encouraged and humbled and created a new being full of affection and gratitude toward God and neighbor. The highest is no longer too much to do. I pray that this something New might come into your lives this Easter season. May you know in your mind and your heart that God comes to you offering unconditional forgiveness and through this may your relationship with God be restored or created.

IT'S A BOY!

2009-04-27T13:19:00.001-04:00

Pretty cool hey!?! Sorry it's been awhile since my last post. I've been crazy busy of late. Hope to put down some new thoughts soon.
Peace,
Shawn

Karl Barth on faith

2009-04-13T12:42:00.001-04:00

At my church we're going to be doing a sermon series on Paul's letter to the Philippians so in preparation for this I picked up Karl Barth's commentary on the letter. Now this commentary isn't like you typical reference that should be consulted for whatever verse your preaching on, rather it is more like your typical book that should be read from front to back. In doing this I have been rather moved. His reflections on Philippians have made that letter come alive to me like it never has before.

With this said I wanted to share with you some of his explication of what Paul meant by faith. It is a rather illuminating reflection. The passage that he is launching off from is Philippians 3:9 which reads:

Philippians 3:9 not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith…

Barth begins by saying that here Paul is laying out in judicial terms the fact that he cannot exist relying on the flesh (i.e. his own power, humanity, ability to fulfill the law, etc…), but in fact exists as a beggar and is rich only as such. With this said I'm just going to let Barth do the talking:

"The believing relationship to Christ altogether excludes any thought of righteousness in which I have to place myself or assert myself any thought of righteousness of my own, because Christ is at once the end of all religion, including any sort of Christian religion… Insofar as belief in Christ is identical with disbelief in this righteousness, Christ is the end of the Law (Rom 10:4), the end of all religion over against its Object (God)" (100 parenthesis mine)…

Here Barth is reflecting on Paul's word, "not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law…" With this in the Background Barth now goes on to give his illuminating discourse concerning faith in the latter half of Philippians 3:9. He writes (What follows is rather heady, but stick with it and read it a couple times I promise it will be worth it!) that in talking about faith:

"Paul sets parallel to it the expression (righteousness from God)—that is, to make faith as little as possible a definition of human action by man himself and place the whole emphasis on the Object that is the ground of faith" (101)…

"The decisive thing in the concept of faith is of all things, not the variously colored psychological capacities that the believer discovers in himself and whose subject he is (although Barth says this often comes with faith)… On the contrary, the decisive thing in all that is the absolute limit of all psychological capaciousness, the limit of his subjectivity, to which the believer is brought—that limit which in fact is designated only by the word God in all its salutary severity, the limit which man, confronted by the Personality, the Subjectivity of God, knows himself for lost and can know himself only as lost—gives himself up, and can take comfort in the righteousness of God only in this self-surrender. 'I would have perished, if I had not perished' is Calvin's description of this believing righteousness—and later: 'man is completely naked when faith offers him to God'" (101).

What Barth is getting at here is the way that God kills us through faith. Here Barth is making sense out of all the death/life language in Paul. Why is this important? Because so often when talking about faith in God we look at what we will get out of the deal rather than the One we are having faith in. Just listen to any sermon that has to do with salvation. It is always about how God will add meaning to my life, how he will improve the quality of my relationships, etc… Now it's true, Barth also points this out, that these things often come as a result of faith, but they are not the center. When we make these things the center faith and God becomes agents to fulfill our agendas and desires and in the end we are believing in and worshiping our own self and feelings. I know this might seem heady and unimportant, but look at much of Christianity in America is it not this?

Scripture, as Barth discloses, shows faith as something that brings us to the end of ourselves. In other words, "the righteousness from God that depends on faith" that is apart from the law is the end of everything us. We have nothing to bring to the table and that which we bring to the table, in light of God's Grace, is brought to nil. That's why Paul can say in the previous verse, "I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish (Greek: dung, excrement, refuse, dirt), in order that I may gain Christ" (Philippians 3:8 parenthesis mine)… In other words, as Barth says, faith makes us realize the limit to everything we bring to the table including our desires. In finding this limit we are brought to the end of ourselves and die; completely naked before the Grace and Mercy of God.

With this said I want to finish with Barth's closing thoughts on faith. He writes:

"From man's point of view, faith in its decisive act is the collapse of every effort of his own capacity and will, and the recognition of the absolute necessity of that collapse. In it he is truly lost. If man sees the other aspect: that as lost he is righteous, that in giving himself up he can take comfort in God's righteousness, then he sees himself—but it is from God that this vision comes—from God's point of view… Thus, the righteousness, integrity, correctness of man does not become a psychological capacity. It remains in God's hand. It is to be sought and found there, not here" (102 bold mine).

I know this was rather heady today. Thanks if you read it the whole way through. As I said in the beginning, this blog site is going to be the fruit of trying to understand my lived faith which is based on the objective truth of a God who "loved the world so much that he sent his only Son." The words of Barth that I shared with you really spoke to those parts of me and I hope that they spoke to you too.

Peace,

Shawn

Karl Barth "Epistle to the Philippians"

Ah, Holy Jesus

2009-04-11T00:06:00.000-04:00

This song was played at my church's Good Friday service. Loved the words (especially the the third verse), thought I'd share them with you...

"Ah, holy Jesus, how hast Thou offended,
That man to judge Thee hath in hate pretended?
By foes derided, by Thine own rejected,
O most afflicted.

Who was the guilty? Who brought this upon Thee?
Alas, my treason, Jesus, hath undone Thee.
’Twas I, Lord, Jesus, I it was denied Thee!
I crucified Thee.

Lo, the Good Shepherd for the sheep is offered;
The slave hath sinned, and the Son hath suffered;
For man’s atonement, while he nothing heedeth,
God intercedeth.

For me, kind Jesus, was Thy incarnation,
Thy mortal sorrow, and Thy life’s oblation;
Thy death of anguish and Thy bitter passion,
For my salvation.

Therefore, kind Jesus, since I cannot pay Thee,
I do adore Thee, and will ever pray Thee,
Think on Thy pity and Thy love unswerving,
Not my deserving."

Ah Holy Jesus: by Johann Heerman

God bless Gerhard O. Forde!

2009-04-03T14:57:00.000-04:00

"To the age old question, 'What shall I do to be saved?' the confessional (Augsburg Confession) answer is shocking: 'Nothing! Just be still; shut up and listen for once in your life to what God the Almighty, creator and redeemer, is saying to his world and to you in the death and resurrection of his Son! Listen and believe!'"
-Gerhard O. Forde "Justification by Faith: A Matter of Death and Life"

Response to a Question

2009-03-13T22:39:00.000-04:00

An old friend of mine asked this question in response to my last post. It's an important question so I figured I'd let you all in on this one (sorry the response is so long I'm not smart enough to say things in one sentence)...

"Shawn, I was wondering...

If you don't believe in the importance of teaching Jesus' morality (only his divinity), then how can you expect a child to revere him? How can someone follow a leader without at least knowing what they believe/profess?

“‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. A second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.”

-Matthew 22:36-40"

To answer your question, let me begin by saying I do believe in the importance Jesus’ moral teachings. I just believe they need to be put in their proper context. If taken on its own, the Scripture you quoted would and should be the basis of all ministry, but when put in the larger context of Scripture as a whole a different picture begins to emerge. You see, it is true that we are commanded to love God and neighbor and if we would things would be fine and dandy, but Scripture as a whole reveals that we don’t. This is because humanity is on the other side of this commandment. The anthropology of the Bible reveals that we are at enmity with God and completely allergic to his demands (Romans 3:10-18, 7:9-11). Thus, laws or demands from God fail to engender what they demand and in fact they almost always provoke the opposite. Because of this the law from our end is always heard as a condemnation.

This is true from everyday life. Put two objects in front of a three year old and tell her that she cannot touch one of them, which one does she go for? Or think about a teenage girl who starts to date the stereotypical “bad boy.” The parents say don’t date him. Do you think she will listen? No, and the harder they come down on her with the law their more fractious and explosive the situation becomes and unless something different is brought in from outside she will either get pregnant or run away to Portland.

Because of our condition, God speaks to us in two fundamentally different ways: law & gospel. Law being what is demanded of us and gospel being what God has done for us. God’s law functions in a different way than what we initially think of when it comes to law (speed limits, fire hazards, etc…). Because of God’s holiness and justice his law demands perfect and pure fulfillment from the bottom of the heart (example being your Jesus quote). The problem is it fails to engender what it demands. It’s like saying to someone in a rip tide to swim harder. Because of this, the law functions to show us our sins and helplessness in order that we might turn to Christ for salvation. You see, unlike the person stuck in a riptide, we are often unaware of just how desperate our situation is. So the law of God shows us just how precarious our situation is. The Apostle Paul says it this way:

Romans 3:19-20 19 Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin

The Gospel comes in the next verse. Paul writes:

Romans 3:21-25 21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it- 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

So through the law I realize how accountable I am towards God and in essence I die. At this point (what addicts call rock bottom) the grace of Christ says because I love you so much I have absorbed the punishment and condemnation of the law so that you might be able to dwell in my presence forever. This grace then ultimately begins to engender what the law demanded in the first place. When I realize that despite all my mess and junk (which the law helps me to see), God himself; the creator of everything I touch, smell, see, and hear; has offered me Grace (one-way love) I am transformed and I begin to love God with all my heart and love my neighbor as myself. The apostle John says it this way, “1 John 4:10 This is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins... 1 John 4:19 19 We love because he first loved us.”
The problem in youth ministry is that in not focusing on this fact it fails to engender what it demands. In telling students not to do or to do this, this, and this; it fails to lead the students to Jesus, but rather to their own efforts which will ultimately lead to despair and/or a forsaking of faith itself. Just think of situations you’ve seen where law has gone out of control. It always leads to a forsaking of faith.

That’s all I got for today. Sorry I wrote so much. Doing so just helps me to clarify the subject for myself. And I’m just not smart enough to answer your question in one or two sentences. I do have one last thought though.

What we’re talking about here is what is truly distinct to Christianity. Every other religion and I would argue every other worldview says you need to do this, this, and this to belong. So ultimately we’re always fighting for acceptance and freedom from condemnation whether that’s in the form of a demanding job, acceptance from peers, success in our chosen life, approval of parents, and ultimately acceptance from God. Christianity is the only voice in the world to say, “Romans 8:1-2 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.”

Christless Youth Ministry

2009-03-12T14:12:00.001-04:00

At my church we recently hosted the Youth Specialties (YS) "One Day" conference. Although the conference itself and the speaker had helpful and important things to say (this year's focus was getting students in the Bible which is always a good thing), I found some elements of YS' message somewhat skewed and even dangerous from a Christian perspective. Before I dive into this, I must admit that I already had some misgivings about the product that YS often puts out. This conference just confirmed those misgivings.

What I believe to be skewed about the YS message is most poignant in their books and curriculum. Check out a couple titles and see if you see a common theme emerge: Be the Change, Soul School, Nehemiah: Discovering what leadership means for students today, Choose, etc… What's missing from these titles? This:

1 Corinthians 15:3-4
³ For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, ⁴ that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures…

In short, much of what passes for youth ministry in this country is Christless and devoid of the gospel message. Now you might say, "well we do mention Jesus in the curriculum," but I say how do you mention him, as a gift for salvation or an example to be followed? Now, I'm not saying that the things they are trying to teach youth are bad, rather I'm saying that they are replacing and/or being confused with the gospel message itself (1 Corinthians 15:3-4 being a summation of that message). In his prophetic book, Christless Christianity, Michael Horton writes, "When even good, holy, and proper things become confused with the gospel, it is only a matter of time before we end up with Christless Christianity" (109). Don't believe me… Talk to any youth and ask them what the Christian message is all about and you'll receive this answer which takes a variety of forms, "being a good person…" That is not Christianity! Sure it might be a part of the natural fruit of the message, but that is not what Christianity is all about. As Luther himself said, "If Charity (i.e. being a good person) be the form and perfection of faith… then I am constrained to say that charity is the principal part of the Christian religion and so I lose Christ, his blood, and all his benefits, and rest in moral doing" (158). I firmly believe that in youth ministry's constant insistence on behavior modification we lose Christ and in losing the object of our faith we lose faith itself.

For example, from 2001-2005 a Notre Dame sociologist Christian Smith led a team in a study of teen spirituality in America. He concluded that the dominate form of religion for teens today is, "Moralistic, Therapeutic Deism" (Horton 40). In other words, it's moralistic because it's focused only on behavior; therapeutic because it depends on how I feel about myself; and deistic because God is watching our behavior from a distance. Thus, it is no wonder that teens are losing their faith in college because what they've been taught in the church is not the distinctive elements of the Gospel (God's one-way-love towards sinners), but rather a moral code and if Christianity is just a moral code than it is a moral code amongst many not "the Way, the Truth, and the Life."

Where do teens get this message? Youth Pastors (Obviously, there are other sources too). From the example we see that in giving teens behavior modification (practical atheism) rather than the gospel message we gradually "de-evangelize" them because when we replace Christ with moral doing we lose the object of our faith and faith itself. It's as Horton states, "Start with Christ (that is, the gospel) and you get sanctification in the bargain; begin with Christ and move on to something else, and you lose both" (62).

So what's the remedy? We need to get away from the moralistic, therapeutic, deism that so dominates nearly everything that is found in youth ministry products and give students the gospel message. As sinful creatures we will always want to return to a moralistic religion of self-help and because of this we need to be taught out of it. We need to be explicitly re-evangelized every day (Horton 42). In his book, Who Will Deliver Us?, Paul Zahl describes it this way, "It is carrying the good news to the unevangelized territories of our personal and social being" (76). In other words, we as youth ministers can't assume that we can leave the gospel behind because the students have heard and even accepted it. The gospel needs to be revisited again and again and again. I pray that YS begins to see this. Even the new Emergent stuff falls into the same trap. It's still what I can do, not what God has done for me.

I leave you today with the words of the apostle Paul and Martin Luther:

1 Corinthians 2:2
² For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

We must set nothing else before our eyes, but Jesus Christ dying for our sins, and rising again for our righteousness: and him must we apprehend by faith, as a gift, not as an example. (Luther 141)

May this be the center of not only your ministry, but your life…

Depression & Hope

2009-03-04T13:13:00.000-05:00

My friends at http://mockingbirdnyc.blogspot.com/ just posted some excerpts from a wonderful article by Kathryn Greene-McCreight that focused on depression. Being one who suffers from panic disorder and depression I believe it offers a true to life description of what it feels like. It also offers some hope too. If you know someone who suffers from mental illness or you do yourself this will definitely speak to your heart. Here are those excerpts that they picked out of the article. For a full description of the article check out their blog (It's an awesome blog site by the way)...

Depression is not just sadness or sorrow. Depression is not just negative thinking. Depression is not just being "down." It's walking barefoot on broken glass; the weight of one's body grinds the glass in further with every movement. So, the weight of my very existence grinds the shards of grief deeper into my soul. When I am depressed, every thought, every breath, every conscious moment hurts. And often the opposite is the case when I am hypomanic: I am scintillating both to myself, and, in my imagination, to the whole world. But mania is more than speeding mentally, more than euphoria, more than creative genius at work. Sometimes, when it tips into full-blown psychosis, it can be terrifying. The sick individual cannot simply shrug it off or pull out of it: there is no pulling oneself "up by the bootstraps."

And yet the Christian faith has a word of real hope, especially for those who suffer mentally. Hope is found in the risen Christ. Suffering is not eliminated by his resurrection, but transformed by it. Christ's resurrection kills even the power of death, and promises that God will wipe away every tear on that final day. But we still have tears in the present. We still die. In God's future, however, death itself will die. The tree from which Adam and Eve took the fruit of their sin and death becomes the cross that gives us life.

In my bouts with mental illness, this understanding of Christian hope gives comfort and encouragement, even if no relief from symptoms. Sorrowing and sighing will be no more. Tears will be wiped away. Even fractious brains will be restored.

Ren, Stimpy, & Romans 7

2009-02-23T21:46:00.000-05:00

Sorry there hasn't been much bloggery this month. Things have been crazy at work. With this said, here is a little clip that I came across a couple years ago that I think exemplifies the law/temptation/humanity struggle that Paul paints in Romans 7. So read the following quote of Scripture and enjoy the clip!

"We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin." -Romans 7:14-25

History Eraser Button (Ren and Stimpy) - The funniest home videos are here

When it comes to fulfilling the law, we are just as helpless as Stimpy and that is precisely why we must hang on to the message of Romans 7 and this snippet from Romans 8:1-3...

"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature,God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering."

wow... really good book so far...

2009-02-04T23:35:00.000-05:00

I came across this book in "Modern Reformation" mag and decided to order it right away. It's really the book I wish I had the smarts and stones to write. It's "Christless Christianity" by Michael Horton. In it he shows how the gospel message has been watered down, taken captive, and even eliminated by what he calls "Moralistic, Therapeutic Deism." He writes:
"Statements that would have appalled previous generations of mainline Protestants are assumed as a matter of course even among evangelicals today..."
He states that Christianity has degenerated into a "how-to" religion.
"Christ may still be called Savior, but we really save ourselves by knowing and following the steps of the new birth and 'victorious living.'"
Though I'm not that far into the book yet, he shows this by examining the messages of evangelical America. From Osteen's prosperity gospel to McClaren, Kimball, and Oestreicher's Emergent Message for Horton they're both the same because they translate, "sin and judgement into actions and attitudes that we can overcome with the right agenda in order to transform ourselves and the world."
For Horton these problems can only be remedied through a proper understanding of Law/Gospel and a theology of the cross. He writes, "It is that vertical relationship with God (law and gospel) that will not allow us to reduce confession to the horizontal plane of our neighbors (moralism) or our inner self (therapy).
So that's the book thus far. If you couldn't tell I'm really digging it. He's really putting words to much of the dysfunction I've been seeing within ministry. I highly recommend this book to anyone in ministry and/or who is just interested in the direction of the American church.
Peace,
Shawn
ps: fellow Zahleans i would love to hear your thoughts if you've read this book and/or will read it...

Another Cool Quote

2009-01-29T10:41:00.001-05:00

Sorry it's been awhile. Things are really crazy at work right now. Because of this all I got is a simple quote a came across in Don Everts' work "God in the Flesh." He writes:

Jesus has always been beautiful. He is, after all, the image of the invisible God. God in the flesh. And seeing him clearly, staring at him and all that his life and death reveal, changes us. That's what the church has always been—simple folks who star at Jesus and are changed because of what they've seen. (Italics mine)

Being one who has a low ecclesiology this quote really hit home. We as the church are simply those who have been forgiven through the blood of Christ and are now left to star in amazement at this wonderful gift (Eph 3:16-21). As we stare in awe at this gift we are changed and inspired to share that message with others through love, service, and evangelism (1 John 4:19). When you really think about Christianity, the church, and discipleship are pretty simple things. Let's not lose sight of this. Let's just hang on to and share that old, old, story of Jesus Christ who loved us in our weakness.

I would like to finish with a quote from the book of Revelation. Here John is describing the church in the presence of God. His definition is surprisingly simple and Don Everts' quote reflects this simplicity. John writes:

Then one of the elders asked me, "These in white robes-- who are they, and where did they come from?" I answered, "Sir, you know." And he said, "These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore, "they are before the throne of God and serve him day and night in his temple; and he who sits on the throne will spread his tent over them. Never again will they hunger; never again will they thirst. The sun will not beat upon them, nor any scorching heat. For the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd; he will lead them to springs of living water. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes." (Revelation 7:13-17 Italics mine)

Even in eternity the core of our identity as the people of God are those who, "have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." May your life and ministry confidently hold on to the fact that, "by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Corinthians 15:10),,,

Acquiescence not Resolutions

2009-01-07T16:44:00.001-05:00

The following was supposed to be a sermon for December 28^th 2008, but I couldn't get things shaped up in time. So instead of letting these thoughts collect dust I thought I'd share them with you.

I must confess to you that the inspiration for this message came when I was staring off during Christmas Eve service. I began to think about New Year's resolutions and how they never work. This is almost universally true, unless someone is motivated by some former grace. This being said, I also began to think of how this is true in almost every self-help resolution we make in life as a whole. When I first moved Maumee OH, my friend and I tried to work out every other day. We made a resolution for it. For a month or so we went on strong, but then it faded away. The same thing happened just recently with the dentists for me. I had a really bad check up, so for the next week or so I really took care of my teeth and I was resolute about that, but eventually my bad habits returned and Mountain Dew came back into to my life. So why is this? Why do we so often fail at so called "self help" or life improvements? Why are New Year's resolutions impossible to keep? I believe it is because we underestimate our bondage to those things that we are addicted to. In short, I think we don't realize just how desperate our situation is. This will become clear in a bit, but we must wade a bit longer.

As Christians we are across the board guilty of because Christianity is often viewed from both the outside and the inside as a way of life, rather than the Gospel. Now when I say Gospel I mean salvation. You see, most of us come to the faith at some real point of need, but the second we become Christians it ceases to be salvation at our point of need, but rather a mere self-help philosophy.

When I was looking for a concrete example of this, I came across a poem called "The Road of Life" that my friend Paul Zahl used to illustrate what I am trying to say here. Now this is one of those poems that are often forwarded to you. It does have a sentimental cheesy ring to it, but I think this is how we view our faith most of the time. It says:

At first, I saw God as my observer, my judge, keeping track of the things I did wrong, so as to know whether I merited heaven or hell when I die. He was out there sort of like a president. I recognized His picture when I saw it, but I really didn't KNOW Him.

But later on when I met Christ, it seemed as though life were rather like a bike ride, but it was a tandem bike, and I noticed Christ was in the back helping me pedal.

In this poem, Jesus is portrayed as one who is helping us to gain mastery over our own projects. Rather than one who saves us from complete self obliteration. In other words, this understanding of God's activity gives our addictions and self-autonomy eternal blessings and legitimacy. Jesus becomes one who helps us master our circumstances, rather than one who saves us from our sins and addictions.

This also works out in our resolutions. "God I have decided to exercise, give me strength." Thus, I leaned on my own strength and discipline rather than a changed heart from God and as a result I failed from exhaustion. Think about your own life… Where is this true… Have you seen this?

You see, the truth is that Christianity as self-help or mastery is a mammoth lie that is not true to reality. Because we are so addicted to ourselves and our own projects we seek through this understanding of the faith to give God's blessing to them when he might be seeking to rid those very things out of our life. You see, Christianity is not about mastery; it's about being destroyed and saved. Christianity is not about your "Best Life Now," it's about death and rebirth. Christianity is not about self-help or a doubling of our efforts for self improvement, it's really about acquiescence and surrender. How do I know this is true? Reality and Scripture…

Just a second ago I said that Christianity as self-help or mastery is a mammoth lie that is not true to reality. We all know this deep in our hearts. There have been points in each of our lives when this view of Christianity has fallen short and we've been left with, "God where are you now?" Through these big hurts we get a glimpse of what actual surrender looks like, but soon we fall back into the old patterns of mastery.

In my own life this has occurred through three stretches of anxiety and depression. The first time it happened I was surprised out of the blue. I was like, "God I'm a good person, why is this happening to me." Eventually I regained equilibrium, but then the next year it happened again. I got to the point of suicide and I realized that either I have to completely trust and surrender to God because I am nothing, or cease to exist. The third time this happened was two years later after I had gotten back from a year of ministry in inner city Atlanta that ended in heart-break. I still couldn't understand why this was happening to me. It was here that I began to discover that Christianity wasn't about self-improvement, but rather surrender to the will of Him who knows better.

In short, through these big hurts, God showed me that His way is not about a mastery or self help, but rather surrender and trust. In Scripture this is poignantly seen through Paul's thorn in the flesh in 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. In the chapter previous Paul tells the Corinthians about his lofty visions of heaven. This is where the thorn comes in. He says:

So to keep me from being too elated by the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me.

Apply this passage to your own big hurt. You get the thorn. In my case it was depression and anxiety. You fight it with all your strength, you lose. You go to others to pray for strength, but you still feel week. It is here that maybe you get to the point of acquiescence and God says to you, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Then you begin to understand that through the very thing you hate God is working in Grace. He wants to shine through the very thing that weighs you down. He wants you to surrender to him.

Paul also shows this acquiescence to be true in our bouts with sin. We like to think that once we become Christians we have now grown to the point where sin is manageable, but the truth is we often find that our battles increase. Again the same thing happens: sin comes in, we fight it, we lose, we ask others for strength, we lose again, and hopefully we bottom out and surrender to God. Paul shows this perfectly in Romans 7 where he says:

I am of the flesh, sold under sin. I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate… Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? (7:14, 15, 24)

In his battle with sin Paul realized that he didn't need Jesus to help him pedal harder, he needed Jesus to save him from drowning.

All this being said, what does this mean to our everyday life and problems? It means that we stop trying to master our circumstances, but rather give them to God. Luther once said that the only cure for sin lies not in satisfying it, but extinguishing it. Our situation is such that we need more than a helper. We need a savior. We need a deliverer. We are not strong enough to overcome our hurts and addictions through resolutions and self help, we need rescue.

The creators of Alcoholics Anonymous understood this perfectly. Through their losing battle with addiction they came to discover that any help must come from deliverance rather than effort. Here's what they said:

So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making. They arise out of ourselves… Many of us had moral and philosophical convictions galore, but we could not live up to them even though we would have liked to. Neither could we reduce our self-centeredness much by wishing or trying on our own power. We had to have God's help. (62)

That's the simple truth, we need to give up and let God be God and let him heal or work through our conditions rather than fighting with all we have. This is easier said than done, but the truth is life eventually makes it true for all of us. Eventually some problem comes that we can't solve. Some hurt comes that we can't seem to heal from. When that happens come to your Savior who wants to shine through your weakness.

In Luke 17:33 Jesus says, "Whoever seeks to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will keep it." In this one paradoxical statement Jesus perfectly describes what I've been painfully describing to you today. Let's not hang on to mastery and control in our relationship with God, but rather let's surrender our lives warts and all to the one who saves us from our sins. This year as you seek to start fresh, do so with the knowledge that it is only through complete surrender to him that we have a shot of life abundant here on earth. Catholic monk Richard Rore said, "True life comes only through journeys of death and rebirth wherein we discover who God is for us." May you discover who God is for you this New Year as you surrender to him in your hurts and pain.

Peace,

Shawn

a gift for you!

2008-12-25T10:49:00.001-05:00

this blog's Christmas gift to you. perhaps the greatest Christmas music video ever!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9KpNznVLlY

Cool Quote

2008-12-17T13:31:00.001-05:00

"I am the man who with the utmost daring discovered what had already been discovered before"

-G.K. Chesterton "Orthodoxy" pg 4

As a whole this book failed to keep my attention, but it did have some slam dunk quotes. This was one of my favorites. I think it perfectly describes what this blog is going for. Just rehashing and reflecting on what has already been discovered.

I also think this quote is an apt description of the history of Christian thought. Pretty much every generation of Christianity finds in its own way what has already been discovered before. From Wycliff to Luther to Wesley to Barth and to whatever other big name you want to throw in there. They discovered in a fresh way that which had already been discovered before.

That's all I got for today…

Law/Gospel, Judgment/Grace, Condemnation/Love, and the Dentist…

2008-12-04T16:56:00.001-05:00

This week, upon noticing that the cavity on my lower front tooth had grown, I thought it was time to set up an appointment with a new dentist. As this appointment for what was dubbed "a thorough examination" began to approach, I noticed myself getting a little anxious; even to the point of a Panic Attack. It was here that I had a sort of new realization about why I, and I think others, hate going to the dentist. In short, going to the dentist is a time when law, judgment, and condemnation seem and are in some senses final. Now this may seem like a stretch, so bare with me and it will make sense.

In a Christian sense, the Law is God's good, true, and righteous demand on the inmost heart. More than this, the Law leaves no one without sin, but proclaims the wrath of God upon all, even people who appear good, and makes us no better than open sinners; hardened and unrepentant (Romans 3:10, 20 & Luther xix). Now this is where the Gospel, Grace, and Love come in; but we're not quite there yet.

In an everyday life sense, there is also law (notice the little "l") that is any form of external command. Although this often does not illicit the same sort of existential crisis that God's Law does, it still has its way of poking at your weaknesses and pronouncing condemnation on where you have failed. In short, law tells us "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about ourselves" (Zahl 2). The painstaking point is that the law does this and leaves it at that. It fails to give us the power and will to correct its diagnosis. For example, if someone says I'm overweight that will pronounce condemnation on me and probably lead to further eating. Similarly if you tell an alcoholic to stop drinking, he/she will drink more. More than this, the law not only leaves us in condemnation it often provokes the opposite of what it demands. This is because our sinful nature is so allergic to any sort of demand. Just listen to the Apostle Paul:

When the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. (Romans 7:9-11)

Again, the law says the right things, it's just because of our sinful natures that the law is unable to engender in us what it demands.

So what's this have to do with the dentist? I think the dentist chair is as close as we can get to God's throne of judgment here on earth (speaking in exaggerations of course). In this chair, all of your "sins" are laid bare. You can't lie and say you did floss, because by looking at your gums the dentist knows you didn't. The fact that you drank gallons of soda is revealed. The fact that you've been lazy with brushing your teeth is exposed. Then, the dentist looks at you and pronounces the verdict. You know he's disappointed in you. You know you should have done better, but you've failed. For punishment you must return next week to the elevated tan chair of judgment for painful, time sucking, expensive, and high pitched drilling. This is why going to the dentist is a time when law, judgment, and condemnation seem and are in some senses final. NO GRACE HERE!

For the weeks following the dentist you brush and floss, but eventually your poor habits return. You know you should brush, but you don't. You know you should floss, but it hurts and is bloody. You know you should brush this evening, but you've stayed up to late watching reruns of CSI Miami again and just fell asleep on the couch. As the Apostle Paul said about his own struggle with sin, "What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death" (Romans 7:24).

This trip to the dentist made me painfully aware of how grateful I am for the Christian Gospel. Because the truth is, we are just as decayed and lost in our lives as I am with my teeth. If it wasn't for the good news of the Gospel, all of existence would end in a dentist chair type scenario where all our sin would be exposed and our condemnation would be final. As Werner Elert says, "With none of our decisions can we stand before God with the claim that any of them conforms to the law; as always our hope lies in the promise of forgiveness" (46). That "promise of forgiveness" is the Gospel.

It would work this way in the dentist chair. The dentist would pronounce the verdict, "Shawn do you floss your teeth with Twizzlers and use Mt. Dew for mouth wash?" But then he would say, "Shawn look in your mouth, all of your cavities are gone, the consequences of your neglect are now in my mouth. Excuse me while I drill these cavities out of my own mouth…" This is what the cross does for us all! The death of One atones for all. "By God's performing one act of judgment all share in the righteousness that 'leads to life'" (Elert 28).

Because of this we, like Paul, we can come to the conclusion that we are wretched humans in a body of death while hanging on to the simple fact that, "There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus… For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering" (Romans 8:1, 3). This is the Gospel which no law, judgment, and condemnation can take away. This is because "when the Gospel speaks, the law must hold its peace" (Elert 1). When the laws and judgments of the world assail you, "run straight to the manger and embrace the Virgin's babe, and behold Him being born, growing in wisdom and stature, conversant among men, teaching, dying, risen, ascending up 'far above the heavens', and having power over all things. This sight and contemplation, will keep thee in the right way…"

The crazy thing is when we comprehend this fact, the Gospel engenders what the Law demands, but that is a whole different story. May this message of Gospel, Grace, and Love keep you in the knowledge and love of God in Christ this Christmas Season.

Elert, Werner. "Law and Gospel"

Luther, Martin. "1552 Preface to the Commentary on Romans" & "Commentary on Galatians"

Zahl, Paul. "Grace in Practice"

“Jesus What a Friend for Sinners”

2008-11-20T14:41:00.001-05:00

While I was shaving the other day I began to muse about the drama of the election and started to think about the political strategies used by both candidates. Eventually my mind went to the fear by association tactics that the McCain/Palin campaign used on Obama. You know what I'm talking about: "Obama pals around with terrorists…" "Obama is connected to the Acorn scandal…" "Obama has a radical spiritual advisor…" To be honest with you, I hate these tactics, but they are affective. I had many conversations with both sides concerning these issues and the majority of people I talked to concluded that, "I just don't know if I can trust someone who had associations like this in the past."

After musing about this for awhile, I began to think about myself and if I had any past associations that would come back to haunt me if I ran for president. After this, I began to think about Jesus and the people he associated with. "If" he were to run for president (and I don't think he ever would so this is a mighty big "if"), would the opposing candidates be able to use his associations against him. The answer is an unequivocal yes. In fact, I believe that the people who Jesus associated with would ruin any chance he had to even run for president. Let's take a look at some of the characters he called friends.

First off, Jesus was baptized by a radical somewhat insane preacher who lived in the desert, wore camel skins, and proclaimed destruction to the status quo. Although his message is more Biblical, I think the message and actions of John the Baptist make the Rev. Jeremiah Wright look as tamed as Joel Osteen. I could just imagine the political commercials: "Jesus associated with John the Baptists who said of the religious leaders, 'You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath… the ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire' (Matthew 3:7, 10). Jesus Christ, too radical to lead."

Think of Jesus' followers. How about Matthew (Levi) the cheating tax collector or Simon the Zealot (Pretty much the equivalent to a Jewish Terrorist)? Imagine those commercials: "Jesus ran around with corrupt money stealing government officials. Jesus Christ, bad judgment, not ready to lead…" or "Jesus is someone who thinks America is imperfect enough to 'pal' around with terrorists…" More than his disciples think about his followers in general. They were really just a bunch of prostitutes, fisherman, widows, radicals, and townies. Would the people that Jesus associated with lead him to the presidency? NO! It would lead him to the cross.

Ultimately the fact that Jesus was a friend of sinners is one of the things that led him to be crucified. His opponents said of him, "Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and 'sinners'" (Matthew 11:19) and "This man welcomes sinners and eats with them" (Luke 15:2). If Jesus were on the scene today I think we (and I'm included in this) would still choose Barabbas over him partially because of who he associated himself with.

So where's the good news in all of this? Firstly, Jesus is a friend of sinners. In a recent sermon Paul Zahl exclaimed that the truth that Jesus was a friend of sinners is the only incontestable fact in the New Testament. In other words, you can't get around it, Jesus loved sinners. He even said it himself, "The Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost" (Luke 19:10). So if Jesus was so passionate about sinners, he is still just as passionate and as loving to you. God doesn't wince at your baggage. In fact, he loves you and seeks to encounter you in those places that are dark and disturbing.

The second thing is this. Above I said that Jesus' associations with sinners were one of the reasons Jesus was led him to the cross. That's true, but more than this, it is precisely because Jesus came to "seek and save what was lost" that he went to the cross. This is the gospel:

"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him"(John 3:17)… "God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us" "For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly" (Romans 5:6)… (Romans 5:8)… "This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins" (1 John 4:10)…

The fact that Jesus loved us sinners so much is precisely why he went to the cross as an atoning propitiation for our sins. Think about that… Spend some time chewing on who Jesus associated with during his life… If Jesus loved them in their darkness, will he not love you in the midst of yours? That's grace… That's love… That's the gospel message… "Jesus what a friend for sinners…"

Peace,

Shawn

Between Reality, Depression, and Hope: some thoughts on the election and low anthropology…

2008-11-12T12:54:00.001-05:00

Because of all the talk about hope as of late, I've been feeling kind of conflicted. Part of me wants to believe that a "new day has dawned," but the other part that is more realistic and sometimes prone to bouts of depression sighs with the knowledge that nothing has really changed and nothing ever will. What we witnessed last week as a nation was something truly awesome. I'm not trying to downplay that. It's just when I hear all this talk about hope and change and then see all the people's faces who think that one man is going to bring this all about, I grow uncertain. Don't get me wrong I like the politics of hope more than the politics of fear; something is just empty when it comes to this kind of talk. It's not just Obama who does this, but also McCain, Palin, Bush, Clintons etc... Just read this Bush quote, "The ideal of America is the hope of all mankind… That hope still lights our way. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it" (George W. Bush, Ellis Island, 2002. For fun read John 1:1-5 and compare the two).

So why I am I rambling on here? During this election I found myself conflicted between my understanding of anthropology (i.e. the human condition) and the candidates' ultimate hope in government and human potential (particularly American human potential). I believe this hope is ultimately borderline delusional. I say this because my experience and faith teach me that humanity has little capacity for good and an endless capacity for bad. Isaiah 64:6 reads, "All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away." Cluster quoting the Old Testament the apostle Paul writes:

"There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." "Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit." "The poison of vipers is on their lips." "Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness." "Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of peace they do not know." "There is no fear of God before their eyes. (Romans 3:10-18)

The key words in these passages are "all of us" and "no one." No one is exempt from this description. More than this, John Calvin writes that, "The perversity never ceases in us, but continually bears new fruit… the whole man is overwhelmed… from head to foot, so that no part is immune from sin and all that proceeds from him is to be imputed to sin." These words may seem harsh, but look at the theater of human history or read the news paper. Sure there are bright moments in history, but look at them with any honesty and it's obvious that even they're still infested with corruption.

This is how the Scripture sees our situation without Christ. It is a closed repetitious theater/cul-de-sac of human despair and evil in which the only exit is either suicide or salvific rescue (Zahl "Short Systematic Theology 9, 68).

It has been said that original sin and total depravity are the only scientifically provable aspects of the Christian faith. Why? Because it's all around us! Even literature from outside the Christian faith is willing to admit this. So how do I reconcile this understanding of humanity with the high anthropology of the candidates and president elect? With his Christian roots Obama is able to say, "My faith reminds me that we all are sinners (World AIDS Day Speech 12/1/06)…" but I still think he has a little too much faith in human potential. So how to I reconcile this? The truth is I don't think they can be reconciled. For me, the dereliction of human existence screams out against putting my hope in humanity. For ultimately that hope will burn out and turn into hopelessness, nihilism, and disillusion.

You see, I'm convicted that our hope needs to lie elsewhere. Speaking in this way may seem depressing, but in the end it points us to the true remedy. In his Heidelberg Disputation Martin Luther writes, "Nor does speaking in this manner give cause for despair, but for arousing the desire to humble oneself and seek the grace of Christ." In other words, when we understand just how dire our situation is, we will reach out for a savior.

Ultimately, I believe the hope that is professed from the candidates leads us astray and into denial of the way things really are. I think the church has also fallen prey to this. If you got involved in any political discussion with other church goers you know what I'm talking about. Whether it's McCain's prolife stance, Palin's evangelical Christian roots, or Obama's social justice prerogatives; the church has hoped in something that will ultimately fail.

This being the case what do we as the church do? I think an accurate understanding of anthropology leaves the church with two options. One is to withdraw from society and gather in the mountains of West Virginia to await the second coming. The other more preferable option is to be thrown into a radical dependence upon God. When we comprehend just how dire our situation is, we in the church will realize that we cannot put our hope in anything other than Christ. This radical dependence will lead to transformation as the Holy Spirit works in our hearts through our continual returning to Christ. This transformation will lead to us in the church becoming more like Christ and consequently we will proclaim and bring this hope to others. We will point others to a real hope that transcends the never ending cycle of human tragedy.

This is where I'm at on this subject. I'd be interested in what you think about it.

My Top 10 Favorite Albums as of November 6, 2008

2008-11-06T16:12:00.001-05:00

For this week's blog I was thinking of writing something about Obama's victory, but I don't think I have anything to add right now that either hasn't been said or is of any significance. This being the case, I thought I might give you another glimpse into of few of my favorite things. The last post was about the books that have shaped me. In the same vein, this post is about the music that has shaped me up to this point. By no means am I saying these albums have had some kind of earth shattering effect on the music industry, but rather these are the ones that have shaped my taste and as a musician have shaped the way I write and perform. In the words of Weezer, "these are my heart songs, they never feel wrong…"

1. "Transistor" by 311

Out of all the albums on my list, I have received the most flack about this one. In 1997 after their insanely popular self titled "Blue Album," 311 veered in a different direction that ticked off a lot of fare weather fans. Me (and I would say many others) on the other hand were blown away by the expansive creativity that this album offered. First off, it really says something about the character of a band that after their breakthrough hit album, they have the courage to try something completely different. Secondly, the musical variety and talent that is offered in this album continues to blow my mindhole. Rock, rap, jazz, punk, reggae, dub reggae, space rock, funk, acoustic, world, etc… it's all on this album.

The reason this album is number one on my list is that it came at a crucial moment in my musical development. In 1998 I was a junior in high school and just beginning to understand what I liked in music. When "Transistor" rolled around it opened me up to worlds of new sounds that I had no idea existed. From there I can pretty much trace every type of music I ever listen to, to something that was opened up to me through this album. That's why "Transistor" is my number one!

2. "Check Your Head" by the Beastie Boys

If I were to pick a band that has been on my playlist the longest it would be the Beastie Boys. The reason "Check Your Head" is number two for very similar reasons that "Transistor" is number one. In this album the Beastie Boys venture off into funky jamming and all out punk alongside some of their most solid hip hop work. The sheer variety of this album is staggering. This album also makes the list because I have many memories associated with it. From rapping "Pass the Mic" with my high school friends Chris and Paul to singing the "Maestro" to "the Amys;" every song on this album is rich with memories and for that this album has forever changed me.

3. "No Code" by Pearl Jam

This was really the first Pearl Jam album that Eddie Vedder really takes control with his song writing ability. I don't know what he was going through at the time, but whatever it was provoked some of his deepest lyrics and most powerful music. "In My Tree" is still one of my favorite songs of all time! I just love this album! So if you enjoy good stripped down poetic rock n' roll, this album is for you…

4. "Before These Crowded Streets" by Dave Matthews Band

It was this album that really converted me into being a Dave Matthews Band fan. Dave Matthews himself has been quoted saying this is also his favorite album that the band has ever done. The first reason this one made the list is because of the time it came into my life. Released around the same time as "Transistor," "Before These Crowded Streets" came at a crucial point in my musical development. It has shaped much of what I like and look for in music ever since. The second reason I love this album is that like "Check You Head," each song is packed full of memories for me. I can still remember singing the song "Halloween" after a rough breakup or "Crush" after a good date. I remember singing "Pig" during a confusing time in college and listening to "The Dreaming Tree" when life seemed to lose its innocence and dreams began to die. This album has been like a good friend to me for a large part of my life.

5. "Ágætis Byrjun" By Sigur Ros

"Ágætis Byrjun" (Icelandic for "An alright start") marks a shift in my musical journey. I've often said that the music Sigur Ros puts out sounds like heaven. It just brings to the surface emotions that words cannot express. Go to itunes and listen to "Starálfur" [Staring Elf] or Viðrar vel til loftárása [Good Weather for an Airstrike] and you'll know what I mean. The music they write transcends words and takes you to that thin space where earth and heaven meet (sorry for the cheesy description).

6. "Pinkerton" Weezer

Five words: Single Male Young Adult Angst. This album is raw and crude. Rivers Como wrote this one during an extremely depressing period in his life. As usually happens during a depression, Rivers produced what I believe to be his most honest and enduring work. This album came to me in the middle of my single college days right before meeting Kendra. Songs like "Why Bother," "Good Life," "Falling for You," and "Butterfly" served as anthems for a frustrated single male college student who didn't want to grow up.

This album also makes the list because it pretty much taught me how to play guitar. About two years into learning guitar I bought the "Pinkerton" song book and learned every song on the album. I can point to those months as the time that guitar playing really clicked for me. Because of this the style of "Pinkerton" shall forever have a place in my guitar playing.

A note of warning: There is some pretty raw content on this album, but I do believe that it's an honest look into the typical young adults mind.

7. "Pet Sounds" the Beach Boys

Probably one of the most beautiful albums ever made!

8. "Abby Road" the Beatles

I own all the Beatles albums, but this one continually blows me away. In this album they'd just gotten off their crazy experimental stage and they had put it together with some good ol' rock n' roll. It is just one phenomenal album

9. "Last Broadcast" Doves

Quite possibly my favorite road trip album. With beautiful songs like "Words," "There Goes You Fear," "NY," etc… you can never go wrong driving towards the horizon with this one. Also this band in general has had a tremendous influence on my own song writing and this album is them at their best. A must have from a rather obscure British rock band.

10. "Takk" (Icelandic for "Thanks") By Sigur Ros

This is my favorite Sigur Ros album. Tighter than "Ágætis Byrjun," happier than (), and less poppy than með suð í eyrum við spilum endalaust; for me "Takk" is Sigur Ros at their best. It is just beautiful. It still manages to take my breath away every time a listen to it. The reason it didn't rank as high "Ágætis Byrjun" because it doesn't mark my conversion to Sigur Ros. Although this is the case, I would recommend this album as the perfect intro into Sigur Ros' music.

That's that. These are a few of my favorite things!

My Top Ten Favorite Books as of October 23, 2008

2008-10-23T17:23:00.001-04:00

Considering my last post was a bit heavy, I figured I'd lighten things up with some top ten lists. This first one has to do with my favorite books. When I say favorite, I mean the books that have had the most influence on me throughout the years. There are some that I'm reading right now or that I've just read that might displace some of these, but they must stand the test of time to see if they make a lasting impact. So without further ado here they are:

1. Out of Solitude By Henri Nouwen

This book saved my life! I'm completely serious. During my year of intense Urban Ministry in inner-city Atlanta I had reached the point of physical and mental breakdown as soon as the first three months. This book came as a Godsend. In it Nouwen helps to put things in perspective by showing us that through solitude with God we can gain the strength to live lives of care and joyful expectation. He writes, "The more we allow our accomplishments—the results of our actions—to become the criteria of our self-esteem, the more we are going to walk on our mental and spiritual toes, never sure if we will be able to live up to the expectations which we created by our last successes… That means that we are not only in the world, but of the world… we become what the world makes us… To live a Christian life means to live in the world without being of it. It is in solitude that this inner freedom can grow." In short it is out of solitude that we can live life, not by what the world expects of us, but by the strength that the love of Christ provides for us.

2. Grace in Practice By Paul Zahl

After wrestling with Paul Zahl's message of complete grace during my first two years of seminary, I was finally blown away by the enormous one-way love of God that Zahl proclaims. In this book Zahl systematically looks at grace in the Bible, grace in theology, the relationship between law and grace, grace and the human condition, grace and soteriology, grace and Christology, grace in families, grace in society, grace in the Church, and grace in everything else you can possibly imagine. The reason this book is number two on my top ten is because it marks a drastic turning point in my life and ministry. No longer was my life and ministry about performance, but rather about being inspired by the one who loved me in my weakness. No longer was my core identity founded in what I accomplished, but rather in the fact that when I couldn't do a single thing to help myself, God loved me so much that he sent his only Son to die for me. In this book Zahl makes this fact the centre-figure force in everything. He writes, "Grace depends on the fact that its origin is wholly outside of myself. This is the heart of love: it comes to me from outside myself… One-way love is also irrational because it reaches out to the specifically undeserving person. This is the beating heart of it… 'We love because he first loved us' (1 John 4:19). That is the premise of this book. Grace works independent of its response, but typically engenders it."

Just a note of warning about this book. It is thick soup. It takes time to read and you won't agree with everything. But if you let the ideas rattle around in your head for a year or two they will transform your life.

3. Come Be My Light: The Private Writings of the "Saint of Calcutta"

This is another book that I can seriously say saved my life. Around January of this year I went through a pretty nasty depression. And when I say depression I mean depression. Couldn't leave the couch really… Anyways, someone gave me this book and it proved to be a tremendous comfort and strength during a desert experience. In it, we read Mother Teresa's letters to her spiritual advisors about her feelings of abandonment from God. Her sort of "dark night of the soul" that lasted for a good portion of her life. Here's a snippet, "That terrible longing keeps growing--& I feel as if something will break in me one day—and then that darkness, that loneliness, that feeling of terrible aloneness. Heaven from every side is closed… Yet deep down somewhere in my heart that longing for God keeps breaking through the darkness." Reading in her own words the abandonment she felt and yet the face that she exuded served as a comfort to me in one of my darkest times!

4. What's so Amazing About Grace? By Phillip Yancey

"Grace is Christianity best gift to the world, a spiritual nova in our midst exerting a force stronger than vengeance, stronger than racism, stronger than hate." This is pretty much the gist of Yancey's book. In it he practically lays out the beauty and absurdity of Grace and how it plays out in everyday life. Six years ago this book was my first blow toward a grace first leaning in life and ministry. If Paul Zahl's Grace in Practice is the systematic textbook of grace, Philip Yancey's What's So Amazing About Grace is the practical handbook.

5. & 6. The Sacred Romance by Brent Curtis & John Eldredge & Wild at Heart by John Eldredge

I put these two books together because they share an author and both entered my life at the same time. I bought the Sacred Romance on sale for $3.00 and after reading it I had to pick up Wild at Heart. These two books open you up to the amazing world and adventure that God has created for us. They show us the incredible story that we are a part of. It kind of makes you feel as if you are in a Lord of the Rings movie and I love that! These books, especially The Sacred Romance, are must reads.

7. The Ragamuffin Gospel by Brennan Manning

One of my coolest moments in my life was hearing Brennan speak at a Youth Conference several years ago. I vividly remember this very old man connecting with youth through his message of God amazing love. In all of his works, this one especially, Brennan proclaims God's love for the broken. Of course he speaks from experience. He writes, "God not only loves me as I am, but also knows me as I am." Well said Brennan! A powerful message that everyone needs to hear, especially the youth.

8. Commentary on Galatians By Martin Luther

"If this doctrine (justification by faith) be lost, then is also the doctrine of truth, life, and salvation, also lost and gone" "Whensoever thou art occupied in the matter of thy salvation… run straight to the manger and embrace the Virgin's babe, and behold Him being born, growing in wisdom and stature, conversant among men, teaching, dying, risen, ascending up 'far above the heavens', and having power over all things. This sight and contemplation, will keep thee in the right way…" People just don't write like that anymore. In his most personal work, Luther gives us the reader enough comfort to last life times.

9. The Purpose Driven Life By Rick Warren

It was this book that led me into full time ministry. It helped me to realize where God wants me. Enough said…

10. Law and Gospel by Werner Elert

This book is uninspiring, really difficult, and at times boring; but it was the book that "converted" me to my current Lutheran Law/Gospel slant on life and ministry. This book made the list because what it taught me runs through my mind every time I write a sermon, council a student, converse with my wife, and pretty everything else. A solid law/gospel understanding of reality helps make sense of a crazy world.

Well that's that. As of now these are the big ten. Some deserving close calls were Dangerous Wonder & Messy Spirituality by Michael Yaconelli, Through Painted Deserts & Blue Like Jazz by Donald Miller, & No Greater Love by Mother Teresa. I hope that if you haven't read some of these books you might just do yourself a favor and pick one up. I pray that they transform you in the amazing way they transformed me!

Peace,

Shawn

Politics and Idolatry

2008-10-09T12:02:00.001-04:00

One of the cool things about my new ministry position is that I get to lead students through Martin Luther's "Small Catechism." For my whole seminary career I ate up Luther's writings and now I get to teach his theology to middle schoolers, life couldn't be any better. Coming back to the subject, about a month ago I was teaching on the first commandment and for a brief moment something dawned on me. Not only that, it has stuck with me and hasn't let me go so I figured I might as well put in on this blog.

As many of you know the first commandment reads, "You shall have no other god's before me." Quite simple, right, but what exactly does this mean. It's one of those things most of us have heard since we were out of the womb. Think about it though, "You shall have no other god's before me…" In doing research to teach this to middle schoolers I came across Luther's definition of what makes something a god in our eyes. He writes:

"A god means that from which we are to expect all good and to which we are to take refuge in all distress, so that to have a god is nothing else than to trust and believe him from the whole heart… That now, I say, upon which you set your heart and put your trust is properly your god."

At the time I was reading this the democratic and republican national conventions were happening. As I was watching these on TV I began to look into my own heart and see whether or not I trusted in one of these two men to be my all and all. Maybe I was trusting America… Then I looked in the eyes of those at the convention. The funny thing is if you were to turn on one of the conventions on one TV and a contemporary Christian worship service on the other, you could barley tell the difference. They are both worship services. Whether it's worshiping the American dream, Obama, McCain, or Palin we all are guilty of setting our trust on something other than God. Just read their material:

"I still believe that America is the last, best hope of Earth" –Obama

"John McCain has the strength to keep America safe and the courage to secure the peace." –McCain's Website

I'm not going to waste your time with any more quotes, but just think about it. Look at Luther's quote again, "That now, I say, upon which you set your heart and put your trust is properly your god."

So these thoughts have been in my head for about a month or so. What really motivated me to write about this now was listening to or reading people, especially Christians, talk about this year's election. So much anger, so much hate, so must investment in one of the parties. These kinds of reactions happen when one is so invested in something that it becomes part of his/her identity. I've done this too. Aren't we committing some sort of idolatry? Aren't we either trusting in Obama, McCain, America, or our economy to truly pull us through?

In the book of Revelation John pleas to the Christians of the Roman Empire not to become too involved in the ways of that nation. He writes, "Come out of her, my people, so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues; for her sins are piled up to heaven, and God has remembered her crimes" (Revelation 18:4-5). Commenting on this passage Tony Campolo writes, "We may live in the best Babylon in the world… but it is still a Babylon, and we are called to come out of her." Is becoming so invested in this political process, this American dream in line with this plea from John the Revelator? Think about it… When someone disagrees with you what thoughts or emotions go through your mind? Is it like they are attacking a piece of you? I ask these questions because I've experienced this.

When we commit idolatry in the realm of politics, we are following and trusting something that is completely opposed to the message the gospel brought to earth. No matter how Christian a candidate claims to be (and I'm not doubting their faiths), the process itself is at its best not even a dim reflection of the Kingdom Jesus is establishing. Commenting on this Kingdom author William Hale White writes, "A glimpse was caught of such a gospel nineteen centuries ago in Galilee, but it has vanished." If any candidate would truly practice what the gospel commands he/she would never come close to winning. Early third century church father Tertullian exclaims, "Emperors could only believe in Christ if they were not emperors—as if Christians could ever be emperors." I'm not saying that the candidates are not Christian, I'm just saying that if they were to truly embody what Christ brought to earth they would not have made it anywhere in politics. If we are attuned to this, we as Christians might not become too invested in any candidate, party, philosophy, etc… because in the end it's all meaningless, pure vanity, and contrary to what Jesus brought to earth.

Celsus, an opponent to early Christianity wrote, "If everyone were to act the same as you Christians, the national government would soon be left utterly deserted and without any help…" I think the same is true today. If Christianity were truly practiced in government, what we know as politics would come crashing down because what exists is completely contrary to what Jesus stood for. Commenting on the political philosophy of Christianity Paul Zahl writes that it is, "Countercultural in the extreme. It has also never been put into practice." I would add that it probably will never be put into practice because of the limitations of original sin and the corrupting nature of power (just look at Gollum…).

So what does this mean for us right now? I think this means that we stop becoming so invested in who we support. It means that we step back and look to see if we are committing idolatry with our candidate. It means that we have charity to others view points. Lastly, it means that we bring the change from outside the system. True change will never come from Obama's center of hopeyness or McCain's maverickness, rather it will come through God's workings in a Christian community worldwide that is abiding in Christ's love and following his example of loving others no matter whether they are friends, family, or enemies. It will come from without rather than from within. True change is God's work. Remember that as the elections draw near and emotions run high. When that happens listen to Jesus' words:

"¹⁹ Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. ²⁰ But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. ²¹ For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." -
Matthew 6:19-21

I'm Shawn Smith and I approve this message…

Two books of interest for this topic are:

Shane Claiborne and Christ Haw, "Jesus for President"

Paul Zahl, "Grace in Practice" (particularly his section on grace in politics)

the purpose of my blog

2008-09-04T15:41:00.001-04:00

Truth be told, I was kind of nervous when I was asked to do this blog. I mean, I'm good at writing sermons, talks, and papers; but when it comes to just expressing my bare thoughts on paper; I really struggle with that. I don't know if its shyness, a fear of being exposed, or a fear of confrontation over something I might say. Also, I often feel like I have nothing to say that is all that important (insecurities coming through). When doing sermons, talks, and papers I stand on the shoulders of giants explaining insights from intelligent people and expressing how I've come to understand them and use them in my life. When it comes to expressing my naked (don't worry no pictures) opinion, I feel completely at a loss for words.
So this was my dilemma and struggle when I was asked to do a blog. Through prayer and brainstorming I came to the conclusion that, "I have nothing really to offer anyone, but what I'm currently going through in life and how I'm trying to interpret that." At first that thought was negative, but then it became the inspiration for this blog.
You see, this blog will be an expression of that reality as I walk my way through life. Being a Christian, most, if not all of my reflections will be concerning the faith’s understanding of God (ultimate objective reality) and my lived experienced (perceived or lived reality) of trying to work through and live out this ultimate objective reality. In other words, it will be a reflection from one who is stumbling along The Way. Someone whose core identity is a sinner saved by grace through faith in One greater than himself. This blog will not be some postmodern ramblings of some subjective truth; it will rather be the fruit of me trying to understand my lived faith which is based on the objective truth of a God who “loved the world so much that he sent his only Son.” In his work “Velvet Elvis,” Rob Bell nails what I’m struggling to say here. He writes, “I’m contributing to the discussion. God has spoken, and the rest is commentary, right?” That’s exactly what I’m trying to do with this blog. I hope you may find hope in what I have to say…
Peace,
Shawn

welcome to my bloggery it shall be blogalicious

2008-08-24T00:13:00.000-04:00

postings coming soon!