No Going Back...

A very friend of mine who is facing prostate cancer sent this to me yesterday…

A few days ago I read these words about those who truly embrace the cross, and as I read I recognized the Lord’s work in my life:

They were living to themselves; self with its hopes and promises and dreams, still had hold of them; but the Lord began to fulfill their prayers. They had asked for contrition, and had surrendered for it to be given them at any cost, and He sent them sorrow; they had asked for purity, and He sent them thrilling anguish; they had asked to be meek, and He had broken their hearts; they had asked to be dead to the world, and He slew all their living hopes; they had asked to be made like unto Him, and He placed them in the furnace, sitting by "as a refiner and purifier of silver," until they should reflect His image; they had asked to lay hold of His cross, and when He had reached it to them it lacerated their hands.

....They could almost pray Him to depart for them, or to hide His awfulness... But they cannot go back, for they have come too near the unseen cross, and its virtues have pierced too deeply within them. He is fulfilling to them His promise, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (John 12:32). [Streams in the Desert, reading for October 17th]

My prayer, like his, is that God will do whatever it is that needs to be done simply so I may know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead. (Phil 3:10-11)

Faith & Sin

As i've been reading of some of the prevailing philosophical thought that developed out of the post-Enlightenment period leading up to liberal and neo-orthodox theology in the 19th and then early 20th century, I have been struck with Reinhold Neihbur's understanding of the real dilemma of humanity.  The problem, as he seems to define it, isn't so much that of finite human beings trying to understand an infinite God.  Rather, the problem is that of sinful human beings needing to be reconciled to a holy God.

 

Stanley Grenz and Roger Olson characterize Neihbur's understanding of faith and sin in this way: "Faith is the acceptance of our dependancy on God, whereas sin is the denial of our creaturehood."  Regarding sin, i take that to mean that it is the denial of our dependancy on God.  And while i think that understanding may be a good beginning, i think it is just the beginning of each.  Both "faith" and "sin" are more that.  The Bible says that "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the the conviction of things not seen." (Heb 11:1 - NASB)  Another translation puts it this way: "Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." (NIV) 

 

Faith must be more than just an acceptance of our dependancy on God.  This sounds rather passive.  I accept that I have colitis.  I accept that I have ADD.  But this can be done in a very passive way, in a way that not only does not require active response but that denies such a response is actually necessary.  Faith is not passive.  The Bible says that if a person has faith, that faith will somehow be made visible, tangible.  It's not that faith itself becomes something a person can see or touch but that true faith causes a person to act in particular ways.  Faith, apart from that kind of active response, really isn't faith - just strong feelings.  If there is one thing that ought to be clear about what faith is and is not, faith is not about strong feelings.  Faith is about conviction that leads to behaviors in correspondance to that conviction.

 

Sin, on the other hand, is more than just a denial of our "creaturehood."  In a sense, sin is two-fold.  There is that aspect of sin that is the denial or rejection of our utter dependance upon God.  There is also that aspect of sin that is ignorance of our dependance upon God.  The Bible talks about sin that is willful as well as that which is our of ignorance, sins of commission and sins of ommission.

 

So here's the question that i won't explore much more than to ask the question.  If faith is recognition of and response to our dependancy upon God and if sin is both intentional as well as ignorance, is it possible to sin "in faith," at least in terms of that letter aspect of sin?

My Friend & God's Glory

My friend, D, is going to the hospital tomorrow for a prostatectomy. He was diagnosed with prostate cancer a few months ago. The surgeon believes for a very successful outcome. Of course, there are always "issues," the "what if's" that are "could be's."

He and his family and I know that God exercises his sovereignty with grace. God's goodness always exceeds our perceptions - and our expectations and dreams. There is more that God is doing in all of this than we can possibly perceive. We must simply (is it really simple?) trust him because he is a good God and he always does the right thing at the right time. And what is good and right is always good and right for everyone involved.

I went over to D's house tonight to anoint and pray over him. He talked about his possible death. That's always disconcerting. But it's also always a very real possibility. The truth is, if D does indeed die he'll be totally blissful over it. We're the one's who will be left with "the mess." Our grief will be for ourselves, not him.

He's in God's hands... completely. Let God be glorified. That's really all D wants. It's all I want. It's always what's best.

Worshiping God

What is it that draws people into the worship of God?

 

It seems to me that at least one factor that is critically important helping people to and drawing people into worship lies with those who are giving leadership to corporate worship.  Those who are leading worship MUST be genuinely engaged in the worship of God as they lead worship.

 

Part of this is my reaction to those who seem to think that it's very important that what goes on in a "worship" service be appealing to those who are present.  While we certainly need to be aware of the cultural issues (language, symbolic representations, cultural stuff in general), we must be aware that our worship is Christ-centered and Spirit-driven, not comfort-centered and feelings-driven.

 

Many churches are adopting what they call a "contemporary style" of worship.  I think that, at best, a "contemporary style" would be simply a matter of, again being sensitive to the cultural issues of modern people.  However, what i often see passing a "worship" in a "contemporary setting" has nothing to do with cultural sensitivities.  The elements of worship itself are being tosses around, in and out, as if every aspect of worship was optional.  There seems to be an intense effort in getting congregants to "enjoy" the service - which ends up being a show, a performance, intended to get people to "feel" something or a certain way.

 

Here are some of the elements i have witnessed in churches that have become optional in any given worship service:

1. Prayer - Whether "pastoral" or "congregational," prayer, as an element of worship, has become optional.  If it is perceived that persons in the congregation (read "audience") might be uncomfortable with prayer, it can be left out.
2. Scripture  - Well, if we're concerned about comfort levels, scripture can be very uncomfortable.  We'll make this optional, too, even and pershaps especially as part of the preching
3. Preaching - Depends on what you call "preaching."  Exegetically based sermons are out.  "How-to's" are in.  Don't talk about sin or hell or damnation, talk about the positive values.  Talk about love and successful living.  Most of what is passed off as preaching is really just public speaking.  There's a difference.
4. Singing - Ok, this isn't really something that's optional.  Actually, it's is perceived more and more that, you can't worship without singing - or at least music of some sort. No music = No worship.  But along with this is the "type" of music utilized.  Throw out the stodgy old hymns.  Let's just use the praise choruses that we all know and love.  Except, what are we praising the Lord for?  On what is our praise based?  God's love?  But how do we know how great is God's love?  Hmmm.  If you're going to start somewhere, better start here.  Maybe we don't need the "old" hymns... but maybe we do.
5. Eucharist/Communion - Wow.  Here'a a biggy.  Totally optional for some.  Nothing there that's relevant for some - at least that's the perception.  Except that, regarding the bread and the cup, Jesus said, "This is my body.  This is my blood."  If Christ is present in the bread and the cup, then what's the unrelevant part?  Others only want to "commune" periodically.  "I don't want it to become common and taken for granted."  Hmmm...  I've been telling my wife i love her nearly every day for about 30 years.  I wonder if i've been doing that too much, too often.

Worship is not about me, about self, about "I."  It's about God, what he likes, what please him.

 

I've heard people complain about written prayers that are read.  There is the complaint that written prayers don't leave room for the Spirit's spontaneous work.  The problem isn't with the prayer on the page.  The problem is with the pray-er on the platform.