Author: japfth

Thanksgiving, a Pop Song by the Police, and Your Mind: Worldview in Microcosm

/ japfth / Leave a comment

“When the world is running down/You make the best of what’s still around.” That’s the refrain in a pop song from a very popular band, The Police. That line reveals a lot about the theology and worldview expressed in the tune of the same name. This week, many Americans will celebratthe Thanksgiving. What Americans believe about God will be evidenced in what we do/don’t do this week. Will we pray or not? Will we express thankfulness? To whom? To ourselves? To our predecessors? To our nation? Our military? Why? These questions go to the heart of the matter. If we are thankful, does that thankfulness not assume there is someone to whom to be thankful? It personalizes the act of thanksgiving. Ought we to be thankful to someone? How you answer that question reveals much. Ought implies a moral imperative. It is a way of saying, there is a right standard, a way man ought to follow. But we’re in a day when many will gather together and be at a loss as to whom they should thank. In other words, they’re cut off from the author of life (God), the only One to whom we ought to be supremely grateful.

Antithesis. Literally, the term means “against/opposed to another argument/idea.” Does that sound too sophisticated of a term? I hope not. It’s simple. In informal language, it’s the other side of the coin. It’s a way of saying this vs. that. This way, not that way. God or Satan. Good vs. evil. Justice vs. injustice. Truth vs. lies.

Antithesis is a mark of thinking. Thinking conceptually is predicated upon one’s thinking via antithesis. In other words, the person who cannot make distinctions cannot properly be said to be thinking conceptually. Here’s the upshot: either we’re in a theistic world (where God is sovereign Creator and we’re His creatures) or we’re not. It’s one or the other. Either we are to thank the God who is, who has spoken, who upholds all things by His sovereign power, or we are cosmic accidents who cannot even begin to explain why things exist, why we’re here, why morality is not an illusion, or how nothing gave rise to everything, all the while undirected.

What does that have to do with Thanksgiving? A lot. Ever had this experience? A family gathers in the kitchen or dining room, and someone is called on to offer a prayer of thanksgiving. But do we think about that? Whom are we thanking? It does not make sense to thank randomness/chaos/nothingness. Are our talents our own? Is our strength our own? Is our wealth our own? Our health? Are we in control of seedtime and harvest? Did we control the gifts of our children?

This is just where we need to understand antithesis. If we do not come to terms with the concept of giving thanks, we are eschewing intellectual courage and honesty. This morning, I listened to a fine sermon by my pastor from Psalm 16. It was about, among other things, how believers recognize that we have no ultimate good apart from God. David wrote, “Preserve me, O God, for in you I take refuge. I say to the LORD, “Your are my Lord; I have no good apart from you.” (Psalm 16:1-2, ESV). David recognized that he was to thank God. Why? Because God is the author of life; God is the fount of blessing. In short, life without God is unthinkable. This is the perfect example of why it’s crucial for us to think via antithesis. Either God or an idol. God or Baal/idolatry. Theism or atheism. Pushed logically, how can the atheist justify being thankful, if he/she believes he came into being accidentally, cannot explain purpose, meaning, or origins? Why ought the atheist be thankful if there’s no one to thank?

Was Sting right? If the world is running down, should we just try to make the best of what’s still around? That’s pretty sad. What would it take for you to consider that the reason the world is running down is because we live this side of Genesis 3? What if this world is running down because we are moral rebels from God, trying to cover our sin? What if the world is running down because the whole creation is groaning from shaking its fist in the face of the God who loves the creation enough to take on flesh and come for all who will repent and believe upon Jesus?

The antithesis is this: either God is, and we ought to honor Him as such or we’re on our own, and the jig is up. Either God has spoken through creation, through Scripture, through conscience, through design, and through Christ and His resurrection, or He hasn’t.

The apogee of this antithesis finds many illustrations in literature, but perhaps none is more familiar than Macbeth’s lines: “Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player/That struts and frets his hour upon the stage/And then is heard no more. It is a tale/Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury/Signifying nothing” (5.5.25-28).

Is life (is your life) a tapestry woven by God or a tale told by an idiot? This is why thinking antithetically is crucial. Let us think with honesty, with logical consistency, with humility, but let us think and then act with conviction. And, yes, Happy Thanksgiving.

What Will It Take?

/ japfth / Leave a comment

images

Paris’ 9/11? November nightmare? What do you think Friday’s murders in Paris by (yet again) Islamic terrorists will be called? Perhaps it’ll be called Europe’s wakeup. I don’t know what historians will call Friday’s massacre but I do know that it matters how we speak of things. Because of political correctness, certain people will not call Islamic terror what it is. Because of Leftist policies, certain people will not call Islamic terror what it is. It may be harder now for sentimentalists to pretend we can “coexist” with those who open up with weapons, screaming, “Allah(u) Akbar!” and murdering crowds of civilians.

Perhaps because America is nearing a season where voters will elect a new president, words are many and actions are few. I’m waiting for Leftists to say that France needed more gun control. After all, the Islamic terrorists would have been prevented from murdering hundreds of civilians if law-abiding French citizens had been deprived of protecting themselves. So goes thinking for Leftists. It’s sad to see that we’re almost numb to the massacres that occur with increasing frequency nowadays. Roll out the teleprompters and brace yourselves for more speeches. I can hear the pundits now: “Our hearts and prayers are with Paris…” Words, words, words. Pundits and politicians will pontificate and blood will continue to spill. What will it take?

What will it take to wake us to the war that is here? Speaking just for my little life, I hear this so often: “Well, God is still in control.” But when I hear that, it is said with a sort of melancholy defeatist air. I don’t know who the speakers are trying to convince. Yes, absolutely, I believe that God is in control. However, recognizing that God is in control is not a call to pacifism in the face of evil. Will that be your rejoinder when evil comes to your door? Are you going to roll over, turn over your family, and say, cavalierly, “Well, God is still in control”?
What if there’s a movement afoot to use Islamic terror as a means of disarming law-abiding citizenry and growing the government to such a degree that the government, rather than being the protector of citizens, is the threat to liberty? What will it take to get us to examine trees by their fruit? What will it take for thinking people to see through platitudinous speech and examine historical facts?

Few of us have to push our worldviews to their logical conclusions. Some folks know more about a coffee company’s lack of Christmas-themed sleeves on coffee cups than they do about worldviews. Paris is under curfew due to Islamic murder, folks, and it’s less than 48 hours old. When evil comes knocking at your door, will we look to pundits reading from teleprompters for solace? What will it take? Will some people resolve to combat evil with good? Will some of us rise and count the costs?

Let us be reasonable. Vigilantism is foolhardy. “Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed” (Proverbs 15:22, ESV). Wisdom and discernment are inseparable: “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety” (Proverbs 11:14, ESV).
Have you ever stopped to ask why God has continually called out warriors throughout history? Moses, given to a temper, was used by God to serve as a leading warrior for Israel’s exodus from pagan Egypt. Joshua was used by God to destroy pagan cults in the ancient Near East and call Israel to covenant fidelity in the 1300s B.C. Samson, another deeply-flawed sinner, was used by God as a judge upon Philistine paganism in the 1200s B.C. Gideon was raised up by God to defeat the Midianites. David, old covenant Israel’s greatest king, was a warrior. He led by example. Deeply flawed? Yes (cf. Psalm 51). But repentant? Yes (cf. Psalm 51). Jephthah, Samuel, and on and on it goes, were men called out to battle. Could God have destroyed everyone and made an end of the mess? Yes, absolutely. Yet he instead called out warriors to combat evil. Why? I cannot know more than what has been revealed (Deuteronomy 29:29) but I would suggest it is one of God’s ways of leading people to repentance. Paul writes that God’s kindness “is meant to lead [us] to repentance” (Romans 2:4, ESV).

What will it take for the world to wake up to the war at our doorsteps? Historically, the church has made two errors. One is quietism/pietism. That is, believers opt to remove themselves from the fight. They retreat into pacifism in the face of evil. The other error is dominionism, where, again, the church misunderstands its role. Instead of recognizing that the church is to call sinners to repent and look to Christ, they look to establish God’s kingdom in this world through political means. (This is what Islam does; it mandates submission. This is in complete opposition to biblical Christianity, which always recognizes that genuine heart change is wrought by the Holy Spirit, not by the sword.) That’s why Jesus warned us in the New Testament, “ . . . My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world” (John 18:36, ESV).

What will it take? Peter wrote that governments are supposed to “punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good” (1 Peter 2:14, ESV). But what happens when that does not happen? The question is rhetorical. We are witnessing what happens when we retreat in the face of evil. Evil wins; blood flows; pundits talk; people die. What will it take?

By no means a Christian, the Irish poet, William Butler Yeats, wrote in “The Second Coming” these words:
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

 

What will it take? We are closer than ever to finding out.

Moral Breakdown or the Gospel?

/ japfth / Leave a comment

This week, some of my family and I took a road trip. During some of the long hours on the highway, we tuned in to some talk radio. As observant citizens know, there is no lack of disturbiurlng headlines. First, a female student at Spring Valley High School in SC was so defiant in class that the police were called to deal with her. Let that sink in. Classroom misbehavior in the government-run school system has reached such lows that police are necessary. That’s how much is tolerated in a culture given over to eschewing personal responsibility. If that’s insufficient, now the student has raised nearly $50,000 via an internet fundraising maneuver. See the tragic paradox? Students who were doing their work, obeying the rules, and even being (ready for this?) self-disciplined are not the protagonists. Nope, they are invisible. The one who gets the attention is the rebel, the defiant, and the one whose behavior is so bad that police have to be called. And nourl-1w she’s making money. We’re amidst moral breakdown. Most people reject the diagnosis that we are all sinners in thought, word, and deed. Most people reject the only remedy—namely, repentance and faith in the gospel. And the moral breakdown continues.

Secondly, Obama spearheaded the release of over 6,000 felons from federal prison this week. Drug dealers were released into America’s neighborhoods at the behest of a nation’s president. Do you think politics might be involved? Do you think class warfare might be involved? Do you think that this decision is consistent with a particular worldview? Should we just wink at evil? Perhaps we can self-reform? If you think the release of felons by executive fiat is wise, will you open your home to these felons? Will you take them in? Perhaps you are looking for a babysitter… Folks, what does it take for a people to think clearly? We’re amidst moral breakdown. Most people reject the diagnosis that we are all sinners in thought, word, and deed. Most people reject the only remedy—namely, repentance and faith in the gospel. And the moralbreakdown continues.

Thirdly, Mattel (the toy maker) may be about to do away with distinctive toys for boys and girls. G.I. Joe is now thought to be sexist. And Barbie dolls are sexist, too. The Left’s solution? Do away with gender-specific toys. Rather than admit that boys and girls are different and complementary, create unisex toys. That’s the lesson Leftists want to teach your children. Do you think a worldview denying the imago dei (the image of God as revealed in Scripture) might be involved here? Do you see what happens when people refuse to acknowledge the obvious? Most people reject the diagnosis that we are all sinners in thought, word, and deed. And most people reject the only remedy—namely, repentance and faith in the gospel. And the moral breakdown continues.

When a nation celebrates villainy but scoffs at repentance, beware. When a nation lauds delinquents but shuns the discerning, beware. When a nation winks at evil and courts nihilism, beware. In a nation where police are mocked and defiance is deified, beware. In a nation where evil is called good and good is called evil, beware. In a nation that refuses to acknowledge that God created us male and female, equally beautiful, equally valuable, complementing one another, beware. Politics is not the solution. Bigger government is not the solution. Political correctness (code speak for silencing free speech) is not the solution. The gospel is the solution.

 

 

Religion and Politics, Part two:

/ japfth / 1 Comment

In about a year from now, America will have a new president, and the differences between political parties and worldviews could not be clearer. Many Leftists/liberalimgress/Democrats are calling for more government, more taxes, the redistribution of wealth, political correctness, and socialized health care. Conservatives/Republicans are calling for less government, lower taxes, wealth creation via private enterprise, freedom from political correctness, and free market competition in health care.

I was born in the late 1960s, so I didn’t really begin to understand political worldviews, or take much of an interest in government, until high school. Then I was working my first real jobs, where I’d look at an actual paystub. I learned the hard way about taxes. Federal, state, and local taxes were taken out. Social security taxes were taken out. Insurance costs, etc. I learned, painfully, about the difference between gross and net income. And I learned that the way voters thought (the worldviews) affected the ways they voted.

Several weeks ago, I wrote about how Christians should vote. Specifically, my concern was the question of criteria. What parameters should Christians bring to bear upon the ballot box? A few fundamentals I suggested included character, the sanctity of human life, and respect for the U.S. Constitution.

Now that we have witnessed the Leftists debate (Hillary Clinton, Martin O’Malley, and Bernie Sanders) their worldviews are quite similar. Homosexual rights (sexuality now is akin to one’s race in Leftism; it can even be changed); women should be able to abort their babies at any time they want; wealthy individuals and their companies should be taxed as punishment for their success; more taxes should be levied from working Americans; climate change (it used to be called “global warming”) is crouching at the door of the planet if we don’t leave off using fossil fuels; Islamic terrorists will somehow quit slaughtering the non-Islamic world if we just have more meetings; and America does not really need to enforce current immigration laws. We don’t need borders, after all, as that could hurt people’s feelings. Borders might suggest that we’re a nation of laws. And of course, only certain lives matter. Cops’ lives apparently don’t matter as much as other lives.

We’ve also witnessed the conservatives/Republicans debate. They, too, dovetailed in many areas. Strong national defense, the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, immigration policies should be enforced, as their lack of enforcement undermines the very essence of law and the U.S. Constitution; lower taxes; Islamic terror should be defeated, not placated; and all lives matter. As to “climate change,” they agree that the science is anything but monolithic in demonstrating man’s impact upon the planet; therefore, we should research clean energy, but not cripple the world’s engines that run on fossil fuels.

There are nuances among both parties and both worldviews, but no honest person can deny the collision of worldviews represented by those on the Left/liberal side of things vs. the Right/conservative side. I do not know of a more polarized time in our culture than what we’re witnessing.

Has America been “fundamentally transformed”? If you had told me as a boy that in my lifetime, women would marry women, I would have been incredulous. If you had told me that men would be vying for legal sanction to marry boys (yes, it’s true), I would not have believed you. If you had told me that the U.S. Capitol would have been lit in celebration of the nation’s Supreme Court legalizing what has always been deemed abominable, I would have said you were in jest.

But I would have been wrong. Polygamy, pederasty, fluid gender identity, etc. are all in the cultural discussion today. Infanticide and Planned Parenthood videos don’t even shock us into repentance. What does that say about the worldviews some of these candidates have?

I hope to vote for righteousness next year, but I submit to you that all worldviews are not the same. May we at least be honest enough about the worldviews at stake.

Oft-quoted but Seldom Understood

/ japfth / 2 Comments

Who are you to judge? The most abused verse in the Bible may be “Judge not, that you be not judged” (Matthew 7:1 ESV). Even people who kimgres-1now next to nothing of Scripture spew this verse as a quip aimed to terminate discussion. We rarely hear this verse taught in context. What usually happens is instead a person is failing to make a cogent and/or coherent argument for his position. He does not want to offend or seem hateful. He wants to be tolerant of even the most inane people or ideas. He wants to be loving and respectful. And this one verse surfaces like a reflex. It is viewed as a way of assuaging one’s own conscience and mollifying those with whom you disagree. It is used as a kinder and gentler way of saying, “Well, I wouldn’t live my life that way, but it’s not really for me to say the other person is wrong.”

 

This one verse, decontextualized, is a specious quote cloaking flawed logic in the guise of love. After it’s quoted, the unspoken assumption is that everyone is supposed to sit back, shake his head, and agree to disagree. The desired result of many who rip this verse from its larger context is a sentimental, “I’m okay; you’re okay.”

 

May I suggest two things? One, Jesus did not condemn judging. He condemned sanctimoniousness. He condemned us when we neglect judging ourselves with right judgment. In the same discourse, Jesus commands us to judge: “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves” (Matthew 7:13-15 ESV). Second, if you or I cease to judge, we cease to think. Solipsism and insanity result.

 

Narrow versus broad? Yes. False prophets? Yes. Ravenous wolves? Yes. How do we know? By judging with right judgment. Jesus also taught, “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment” (John 7:24 ESV). When’s the last time you heard that verse? Judging is commanded and commended.

 

Judging is unavoidable for rational creatures. You judge whom to befriend; you judge whom to marry; you judge your children’s character and behavior (character’s extension); you judge in politics. “Open your mouth, judge righteously” (Proverbs 31:9a ESV). Failing to judge is the end of rationality. Judge rightly.

The Death of Appreciation?

/ japfth / Leave a comment

Very recently, I led another memorial service for an 84-year old Army veteran of the wars in Korea and Vietnam. The man had been a sergeant major (SGM) when he retired. He continued his service as a defense contractor upon retiring from the military. In the last chapter of his life, he moved near Ft. Benning, GA to be near a longtime friend under whom he’d served as a first sergeant (1SG) during the early 1970s. He spent his last years deer hunting in west Georgia. Finally, the cancer he’d battled for years conquered his body, and he died. When I spoke at his memorial, and before we committed his asheist2-4686483-word-death-on-paper-and-broken-pencil-in-hands to the ground, most of the chairs on the rostrum were vacant. Most people did not know or care of this man’s passing. As I read Scripture, prayed, and consoled a couple of his friends, I had an overwhelming sense that there were multiple deaths at hand. We were not just marking theimgres-1 passing of another veteran’s life. I was witnessing in microcosm a culture that chooses to forget what is praiseworthy. What/whom one generation fails to honor, thenext generation will forget altogether.

People are busy, I understand. No one can be more than one place at a time, I understand. However, I fear that there’s a sense of callousness in our culture today towards almost everything once viewed with honor. What was heretofore praiseworthy is now neglected or even mocked. It is as if many people’s consciences are seared. But should we not laud that which is praiseworthy, when it’s in our power to do so? What does it say about a culture that forsakes its warriors? What does it reveal about us when we inventory what fills our time? What/whom one generation fails to honor, the next generation will forget altogether.

Nothing quite diagnoses a culture’s ethos as clearly as seeing what it worships. Man becomes like what he worships. But what does it mean when many worship at the altar of self, or at the altars of what Francis Schaeffer called personal peace and affluence? In other words, are we now so self-absorbed that we fail to recognize the passing of those that lived lives of sacrifice, courage, and honor? Are we so taken with our conveniences that we cannot think of those who gave of themselves for the greater good? Some of the deepest lessons I have learned come from times I’ve spent in cemeteries. They are among the quietest places on earth. You can hear yourself think. As you survey the tombstones, the mausoleums, the white markers, you relearn that this life is passing. You learn that man is a vapor. You learn that generations come and go. In Ecclesiastes, Solomon writes: “For of the wise as of the fool there is no enduring remembrance, seeing that in the days to come all will have been long forgotten” (Eccl 2:16a ESV). But Solomon’s thesis in Ecclesiastes was how not to succumb to that. The answer is to look to God, not to oneself alone, not just to our personal peace and affluence, but to recognize that which endures. But I’m suggesting that we are living in a time and culture that largely chooses to neglect what should be appreciated and worships that which should be minimized. The banal has replaced the praiseworthy. What/whom one generation fails to honor, the next generation will forget altogether.

When the apostle Paul was in prison in Rome, he wrote a letter known as Philippians. It’s a short New Testament book about Christ’s humiliation and subsequent exaltation. It’s also a NT book of encouragement. But what I want to focus on here is how he instructs the Philippians in matters of what they should honor, of what they should deem important: “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things” (Phil 4:8 ESV). It’s vital to understand what is honorable and praiseworthy, not what our selfishness deems honorable and praiseworthy.

If we want to know what we honor, let us examine how we spend our time. We are not witnessing the death of appreciation; we are witnessing idolatry—the appreciation of the wrong things/ideas/gods/people.

The Longing for Encouragement

/ japfth / Leave a comment

One of the blessings of being in Christian ministry is personal discipleship. Because I’m regularly teaching biblical doctrines in Protestant services in the military, as an adjunct instructor at a university, or in the local church setting, many ofEncourageWordle my hours are taken up in study and preparation. Contrary to some people’s experiences, sustained research and study are not burdens to me; I emerge from those disciplines reinvigorated. Recently I was requested to speak at a Bible study to military personnel and Department of Defense civilians. I’d been studying in Psalm 67, so I thought that would be a sound passage from which to teach. It was not just because that is where I’d been in some of my recent studies. It was more than that. I consistently see the longing for encouragement that we all have.

Because we are fallen creatures, and because we live in a fallen world, the pathos of this world is more properly identified as tragic rather than comic. Suffering is real. Unlike the cult of Christian Science, the Bible does not deny the reality of suffering. Unlike pantheistic worldviews like Buddhism, the Bible does not teach that suffering can be avoided through an eightfold noble path. Among other profound truths, the Bible teaches that, because this world is fallen, Christians are pilgrims moving through this valley of the shadow of death.

The Bible repeatedly uses the metaphor of the good shepherd (Jesus) who guards his sheep, abiding with them amidst evil, and preserves them from ultimate death. This is why Jesus, after his incarnation, repeatedly referred to himself as the good shepherd: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (Jn 10:11 ESV). He reminds his followers that most of the world consists of thieves and wolves in sheep’s clothing, and that he (God alone) is wholly trustworthy. Jesus is the shepherd who encourages his sheep amidst suffering. This life’s slings and arrows are endurable because of Jesus, the conquering shepherd: “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep” (Jn 10:14-15 ESV).

There is a relationship between Jesus as the good shepherd and his sheep that endures because of the shepherd’s triumph. Yes, the good shepherd laid down his life for his sheep (the crucifixion), but three days later, he took it up again (Jesus’ resurrection). Therefore, his sheep are to have hope. We can be encouraged. This is the good news. The gospel does not mean that the sheep (Christ-followers) are exempt from suffering, but it does mean that we are equipped to endure, because we are buried with Christ and raised because of his triumphal resurrection.

Psalm 67 begins with a reference to the well-known Aaronic blessing of Numbers 6:25. This is where God told Moses what to teach Aaron about blessing Israel. Like many of you, I love that blessing: “The LORD bless you and keep you; the LORD make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you; the LORD lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace” (Nub 6:24-26 ESV). I think we gravitate towards it because we sense its intent: God promises to bless his people. It is sheer encouragement, and the whole creation groans for encouragement.

But when you read Psalm 67 closely, you see that God blesses his people in order that they might bless others by introducing them to this fount of blessing–God himself. He blesses them so that God’s way “may be known on earth, [God’s] saving power among all nations” (Ps 67:2 ESV). In other words, the greatest blessing is God himself. Upon receiving the blessing of God, the proper response should be outward—namely, to declare who God is and what God has done.

Growing up as I did in a local church, I remember old ladies saying this many times, “May God bless you, and make you a blessing.” Now, my personality tends to recoil at clichés and platitudes, but there is great truth in that phrase. We are blessed in order to be a blessing.

So what does this have to do with the longing for encouragement? Let me share one anecdote to illustrate it. Several months ago, a senior noncommissioned officer was retiring from the Army after 30 years. He’d been a chaplain assistant his entire career. He was (and is) one of the most gentle and humble men I’ve ever known. Never one to put his name out front for recognition, he eschewed the limelight. He was more like Mary (see Jn 3:3) who poured oil upon Jesus’ feet and dried them with the locks of her hair. Neither this soldier nor Mary was self-absorbed; their focus was outward—upon others because of Christ. Speaker after speaker lined up to share stories of how SFC Franklin had touched their lives by pouring his own life and ministry into them. Sometimes he had done it just by his gentle manner. At other times, he served them by providing a small service at just the right time. But the pattern that emerged over and over was of the encouragement he brought. When it came time for us to listen to his remarks, he kept them short. He said this, “I’ve always wanted God’s favor upon my life. In order to ask for that, I have aimed to please God first. Thank you all for allowing me to be part of God’s plan.” Then he stepped away from the podium, away from the microphone.

Scores of us lined up afterwards to shake his hand, to embrace him, to wish him blessings in his future endeavors. And we all had similar stories: he had encouraged us via his life and ministry. We all long for encouragement. I get that. What is much harder to inculcate and live out, however, is to encourage others. I guess those old ladies in the small Baptist churches were (once again) right all along: May God bless us, and make us a blessing.

 

And You’re Surprised?

/ japfth / Leave a comment

The end depends upon the beginning. That seems reasonable enough, right? If it’s reasonable, then why are many people surprised at the results of wrong beginnings? Yesterday, I went forurl a long run. At the end of my run, I entered a gym where I work out when I’m away from home. Upon entering, I was flooded with images of the massacre by 26-year old Chris Harper-Mercer. Multiple people at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon had just been murdered. Based upon some eyewitnesses to the murders who’d barely escaped death, Mercer had a track record of hatred, especially for Christians. Sound familiar? Are you still surprised at the violence? Now, I have no idea what worldview Mercer lived by. That is not my main concern here. What is my main concern, however, is how many people express surprise at violence perpetrated against others. Before someone objects that I’m inciting violence, read on. I am not inciting violence; I’m asking readers to go deeper. I’m asking you to examine your view of man, your anthropology. Why? Because the end depends upon the beginning. If you have an incorrect view of man’s nature as fallen, you will continually be surprised when violence invades our lives. However, if you have a correct view of man’s fallen nature, a correct anthropology, you will still grieve, yes, but you will understand why violence occurs with such frequency.

 It makes all the difference in how you view human nature. What is man like? Are we born good? Is man’s nature by disposition one of love, unselfishness, magnanimity, self-sacrifice, and humility? Do those terms describe what you see and read each day on your TVs, computers, and newspapers? Do you have to teach your children how to misbehave, since they are so innocent, so good? Don’t you remember someone having to teach you how to lie, how to be selfish, how to make the world about you? Nor do I. But why? It’s because man is fallen. Therefore, we ought not to be surprised when fallen and unredeemed people act in accordance with their nature. We should be surprised if people were good by nature, but we’re not. We’re fallen. We are sinners. We need to be redeemed from our fallen state. The end depends upon the beginning. If we begin with the presupposition that man is good by nature, then it would make sense to be surprised at violence. But if we begin with the admission that man is evil by nature, then we may understand occurrences like yesterday in Roseburg, OR, and Sandy Hook, NJ, and Virginia Tech, and Fort Hood, TX, and Aurora, Colorado, etc. The end depends upon the beginning. View man’s fallen nature correctly, then we can begin to address the answer.

The Bible uniquely addresses the issue of man’s nature. Unredeemed man is, according to Scripture, wicked and a deceiver: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jer 17:9 ESV). Jeremiah wrote in the 600s B.C. But Moses penned the same description of man’s nature thousands of years prior: “The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (Gen 6:5 ESV). But perhaps this description of man’s nature changed with New Testament writers, right? Surely, we have progressed. Listen to Paul in his epistle to the Romans, written in the 50s A.D: “For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” “Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive.” “The venom of asps is under their lips.” “Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known.” “There is no fear of God before their eyes” (Rom 3:9b-18 ESV). Now ask yourself this question: Which view of man’s nature is more accurate? Which view corresponds to what you see with such frequency?  The end depends upon the beginning. Understand man’s nature, and only then will we understand his behavior.

But here is the good news. God offers us fallen sinners a way out. It’s not a program; it’s not therapy; it’s not turning over a new leaf; it’s not trying to be a better you tomorrow. It’s repentance of our sins and looking to Jesus as the Savior. Here is the good news in microcosm: “For our sake he [God the Father] made him [Jesus, God the Son] to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him [Jesus] we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor 5:21 ESV). The end depends upon the beginning, at least in most things. But because of Christ, all who flee to him in repentance and faith, have transformed natures. It’s not because we’d ever reform our own natures; we wouldn’t. It’s not because we are smarter than our neighbors; we’re not. It’s because God circumcises our hearts of stone and gives us hearts of flesh. Scales fall from our eyes. We see that this gospel redeems our fallen nature and fits us for heaven, all because of God who came to seek and save the lost. The end depends upon the beginning, and the beginning and the end of all things is found in Jesus.

 

The Forbidden Topics: Religion and Politics (Part one)

/ japfth / 2 Comments

 

imgresimgres-1No, I would not presume to tell anyone for whom to vote, but I would presume to speak to Christians about biblical guidelines for voting. Christians have an objective guide. Scripture is to inform our beliefs and behavior. In other words, the Christian worldview is to be shaped by the Bible. That means Christians are to be a discerning people. In a culture given over to superficiality, glitter, and celebrity, Christians ought to discern the differences between what God reveals as praiseworthy and what God reveals as wicked.

The media traffic in whipping up people’s emotions. The days of articulate, well-reasoned, thoughtful debates are long gone. I saw about three minutes of a recent debate, and that was about two minutes too long. Why? Instead of debate about substantial ideas, I heard almost nothing but ad hominem attacks. Interrupting one another, finger-pointing, crass language, and juvenile insults degraded the once noble office of U.S. president. So, what should the Christian do? Give up? No, I don’t think that is biblical. We are called to be good citizens, to pray for those in authority over us, and to live godly lives in an ungodly world (Mk 12:17; Rom 13; 1 Pt 2:13-17).

So what are some basic biblical guidelines for Christians when it comes to voting in this country, especially when our options are, to some degree, out of our control? I’m suggesting at least three here (more are to follow): character, a demonstrated commitment to life, and demonstrated commitment to upholding the Constitution. Other guidelines may follow in subsequent articles, but today my focus is theological/philosophical and specifically upon Christian U.S. voters.

First, character. Perhaps I can best illustrate what I mean via a real event that happened a few years ago when I was teaching a debate class to high school students. I asked the students (17 and 18-year olds) who they thought was one of America’s greatest presidents. Immediately, most of them said Bill Clinton. I said, “Okay, can you tell me why you think that?” Well, the class went quiet. I said, “Okay then, well what was Mr. Clinton known for?” Immediately, the class erupted in unison: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman!” They quoted Mr. Clinton’s own words. Thereafter, intelligent discussion ended. They began giggling and joking coarsely about body fluids, interns, and how Bill was a real hero to them. Now, think about this. When teenagers cannot tell you anything substantive about the U.S. presidency except that one of their heroes was an adulterer who lied under oath, what does that reveal about the character deficit in the nation? Not only does the office become cheapened, but the electorate becomes coarsened. Discernment is lost, celebrity is king, and we all lose. It’s important not to confuse categories. The students were, after all, teenagers. Most were not Christians, so I don’t want to stretch the illustration too far. I merely want to suggest to you that lack of character cheapens us all.

For voting Christians, therefore, we ought to look for a man/woman of character. Even though our options for president may not be Christians, we ought to discern the difference between those given over to wickedness and lying versus those who are men/women of character and who are faithful to their words. Is the person running for office noteworthy for his integrity, his fidelity to his promises, his character? Scripture calls us to discern. “Many a man proclaims his own steadfast love, but a faithful man who can find?” (Pr 20:6 ESV).

Second, commitment to life. I’m sure I will take some hits for this, but that is fine. If a man/woman asking for my vote does not protect the sanctity of life, I cannot support him. Not only is the sanctity of human life in our Declaration of Independence (“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”), it is fundamentally biblical. Scripture teaches that all human life is created in the image of God: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gen 1:27). This foundational truth is non-negotiable for the biblical Christian because in it, we see that all human life has value. Because humans are created by the design of the holy, loving, and perfect God, human life is not to be sold for a profit by Planned Parenthood, to be prostituted, to be desecrated or discarded in rubbish tins.

The fact that we are living in a nation where 177 Democrats (no Republicans) recently voted that infanticide is the right of the mother, is disgraceful. Let that sink in, folks. On September 18, 2015, when H.R. 3504 went before the House for a vote to protect babies born alive after their mothers’ attempts to abort failed, and the child was born alive, 177 Democrats voted that the mother should be allowed to legally have her child aborted…even after birth. In other words, the child is alive, outside of the womb, and 177 Democrats voted it’s alright to murder it. You can link to HR 3504 via a simple Google search.

A political party in our nation says that a mother can deliver her child, then have it murdered, and it’s the woman’s right. If that is not barbarism, nothing is. For the Christian voter, the man/woman who would defend such a practice ought to be excluded from consideration as president. We remember that 6,000,000 Jews were murdered in WWII, right? Yet since 1973, just in America, 59,000,000 million babies have been murdered. Today alone in America, 2,900 babies have been murdered. That is a holocaust. If that barbarism does not convict you, I don’t know what will. Ten times as many babies are murdered as the number of Jews murdered in WWII, and yet there is an entire U.S. political party who defends this? The nation that murders its mothers’ wombs cannot, in good conscience, ask for God’s blessing. What would be just is God’s judgment. The biblical worldview teaches that God is the Author of life (Acts 3:15), and that life is sacred: “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made” (Ps 139:13-14a).

Third, the U.S. Constitution. If the person running for U.S. president views the Constitution as an antiquated document with no bearing upon governance of the nation, then Christian voters need to know that. I have paperback copies of the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution that I carry. When I’m sitting in traffic, or waiting in the optometrist’s office, or other places where I’m waiting, I reread them. If Americans do not know these documents, we are complicit in the continual downgrade of intelligent discussion. If candidates for political office oppose the Constitution, we need to be educated enough to recognize that, and vote accordingly.

There is much more to say about Christians in the voting booth. Christians need to discern; we need to recognize trees by their fruit; we need to evaluate demonstrated behavior rather than stated belief. We need to recognize, before it’s too late, that “He [God] makes nations great, and he destroys them; he enlarges nations, and leads them away. He takes away understanding for the chiefs of the people of the earth and makes them wander in a pathless waste” (Job 12:23-24 ESV). God is sovereign over historical events, but Christians are to be articulate and thoughtful citizens and voters. We need to learn that a person’s character, his/her demonstrated behavior when it comes to the sanctity of life, and his/view of the U.S. Constitution (at a minimum for Americans) reveal much. To all who will do the work of thinking deeply and praying for the next leaders of this nation, may we be faithful, to bear witness, and to live “godly lives in the present age” (Titus 2:12).

The Paradox of Connectivity

/ japfth / Leave a comment

Wired. The digital age. Age of voyeurism. The “I post, therefore, I am” lifestyle (see Os Guinness’ wonderful book Fool’s Talk). I call it selfiedom. It’s where a culture is given over to worship of the self, and the sacred has been ejected in favor of the profane self. Selfiedom is the Digital Tower of Babel. Maybe the term selfiedom won’t catch on, but dealership-social-mediawere folks to tweet/post/blog about it, it just might. See the temptation? Here’s the issue for consideration: Are we not more connected digitally than ever in history, yet perhaps more lonely than ever in history? There’s a paradox in the fact that people have hundreds, or even thousands, of virtual friends but few, if any, actual friends. It’s now in the vernacular to call people “Facebook friends.” That is revealing. When is the last time we went to dinner with our Facebook friends? We may view posts and tweets, but I wonder if we are meaningfully connected to other people.

Over the last few days, I served as an instructor at a marriage retreat. We were ministering to current and former military personnel and their spouses. We held the retreat at a lake in the hills of north GA. The weather was spectacular—70s and 80s in the daytime, 50s and 60s at night. Clear skies, a slight fall breeze off the lake, waterfowl sliding across the skyline at dawn and dusk. Truly beautiful. Some of the helpers who worked at the location were high school and college students. As I was walking the shores of the lake one evening, I saw a group of 6 girls assembled on a long bench overlooking the lake. The girls were all dressed in shorts, t-shirts, and sandals. And do you think they were all talking to each other? Do you think they were even looking at each other? Do you think they were even facing each other? No…to all three questions. They all were connected to Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or other social media. They were scrolling but they were not meaningfully connecting.

Now, I know there’ll be those who object. “They’re actually reaching more people,” one might say. I disagree. Because I work with young people (it’s growing just as serious with older people, too, however), I know what I’m told over and over by couples I counsel: they are lonely. One or both spouses spend hours online with virtual friends but don’t spend time with actual friends. We’re connected by way of the Web instead of connecting with the heart. Be honest. Would you rather have a text message from a virtual friend or a hug from an actual friend? Now, if distance precludes that, certainly we all welcome the conveniences ushered in via technology, but you see my point.

As I watched the girls assembled by the bench, they weren’t truly with one another. They wanted to see if others approved of them in the digital world. They took selfies. They posted. Rather than making lasting memories with each other, they tweeted. But something was lost. They wanted others to like their individual statuses by portraying themselves as satisfied, as the heroines of their individual stories.

We’re awash in a culture where the favorite pronoun is “I.” The culture celebrates the swagger of style instead of still waters of character. Someone sent me a book recently entitled The Road to Character that explores this whole theme. The author’s point is that the Adam I life (your resume of accomplishments, your degrees, your titles, your status, etc.) has largely eclipsed the Adam II life (the things people will say about you at your funeral about you being a man/woman of character, of sacrifice, of trustworthiness, etc.). He’s spot on.

imagesWe’re often connected to the Web but not to each other. So, what to do? The Web is not going away, I’d venture to say. Technology will increase rather than decrease, in its availability and speed. But might we pay a price? Might we be paying it already? It bears repeating: I hear from husbands, wives, and children repeatedly: “My wife/husband/son/daughter/friend won’t talk to me. Instead they play on their iPad or phone all the time.” Again, I’m not blind to how the logic cuts both ways. Here I am writing on a computer, posting it on the Web, and hoping others will be on the Web to read it and think about it. I see the paradox. However, just like the girls gathered near that bench this weekend up at the lake, I want genuine contact, not just virtual contact. The Digital Tower of Babel is just as idolatrous as the ziggurat in Genesis 11. In the Confessions, Augustine wrote, “Our hearts are restless until they can find rest in you [God].” That’s often quoted. But what’s less explained is the context out of which Augustine wrote. Despite being raised by a Christian mother, Augustine pursued a life of sexual lust and idolatry until Christ convicted him of his sin. It was only after being convicted of his sin that he understood his own Tower of Babel, wherein he was the god at the top. Because he excelled in academia, in rhetoric, law, languages, etc. his pride led to his downfall—a constant theme in literature and in life. Yet Augustine longed for true friendship, true rest, true connection—and this was millennia before the Web.

Human nature does not change until it’s transformed by God’s grace.

imgres  Scripture records one of history’s most moving tributes to friendship: “As soon as he [David] had finished speaking to Saul, the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul” (1 Sam 18:1 ESV). What you see in the subsequent pages is a story of true, rather than apparent (we’d say virtual in our day), friendship. Should we use technology to improve relationships? Yes. However, I am not confident that will occur until we scroll our feeds less, and love our neighbors more.