Re-Thinking The Sunday Church Service (Part 2)

This is a re-post of the second part of my ongoing blog series, Re-Thinking The Sunday Church Service.  This series appeared in late 2008 to early 2009.  For a brief explanation, click here.

_____________________________________

I'm going to take Part 2 of this series to tell why I chose the series title I did. Simply, "The Sunday Church Service" is what most of us can relate to. As my friend Bruce points out in his post What Hebrews 10:25 Doesn't Say, [Update: this link is no longer available] much of our own personal experience or ecclesiastical opinion is read back into the text. I'm the first one to point out that the Greek word ekklesia, most often [mis]translated into English as the word "church", has as its root meaning "assembly" or even "congregation." I'm providing two links that deal with this issue here and here. I'm not claiming to agree with everything said in both of these links, but if the good Protestants in my theological past can use this definition of ekklesia against the structure and teachings of the Roman Catholic church, I can surely use them against the structure and teachings of the Protestant church who have adopted nearly the same things over the centuries.

Most of us are accustomed to the Sunday Church Service (or "worship" service). Meeting on Sunday is nowhere forbidden in the New Testament. Neither is meeting in a building, with a cross. Neither is meeting at the same time every week. Neither is stained glass. Neither are chairs instead of pews. Neither is preaching, nor a sign outside telling passersby what is being preached. Neither is a choir or making tapes of the sermon or pastors, elders and deacons or fellowship meals in the basement. I'm not saying, either, that structures other than the ones most of us are familiar with are wrong. I'm just going to focus on what most of us know and address the possibility of reforming it from within. I'm going to address what I think is a lack of application of Scripture that results in a lack of real community, a lack of a sense of belonging and a lack of a sense of being useful.

Friday Night Potpourri

Weak week:

• This was the first time I had to change a tire in our van.  All new stuff to me.  Trying to find the right tools in the back and coordinating it with the instructions.  But I got it.  Putting everything back together was the easy part.  A very large screw and even larger washer were embedded.  We got the screw back from the tire shop as a souvenir.
• The kids went wild this week with getting stuff up onto the roof.  Plastic easter eggs, foam balls, then a whole line of things, each one meant to knock the previous one down that was used to knock the previous one down that was used.... okay, you know what I mean.  Broom handle very valuable.
• It's time to tape over the hole in the mailbox so that wasps don't start a new nest.
• Everybody into the pool!  Okay, well maybe not.  The weather is better, but it's not close to being summer.  Only a few more months until it's so hot I wished it were winter again.
• What kind of ale to they drink in a royal pub?  Maybe it's a stout.  I'll have to Google that one.
• A crowd at Buckingham Palace was just about the same size as the Giants World Series victory parade.  Must have been an important event.
• Bop.

Re-Thinking The Sunday Church Service (Part 1)

This is a re-post of the first part of my ongoing blog series, Re-Thinking The Sunday Church Service.  This series appeared in late 2008 to early 2009.  For a brief explanation, click here.

_____________________________________________

In this new series I will look at some things I think are ailing churches in America today. And have been for quite some time. Many people are leaving churches because they find no difference in church than they do outside of it. They either don't fit in, or if they do, they don't see a difference church makes in their lives. They see a lack of community in church.

I'm not going to talk about the obvious absurdities like mud wrestling pastors to increase attendance. Nor am I going to talk about music and which instruments are appropriate for church; nor about what women should wear on their heads or whether Calvinism is better than Arminianism. I'm going to look at problems in churches whose theology is fairly decent; churches that have had a rich tradition and history. I will touch on liturgy, but not as a main topic.

I will focus primarily on relationships within the church, most specifically the actual Sunday church meeting itself. These relationships are described by the bible. I will write about the relationships between God to man, and man to man.

A main area of focus will be this:

Has our American church tradition so focused itself on the worship of God - loving God according to the first great commandment - that we have neglected the second greatest commandment - loving our neighbor as ourselves - when we gather on Sunday?

I'm still sorting out things in both my own experience and in what the bible says about our relationships, so this series will develop over time. Hope you enjoy it, and as always, comments are welcome.

Re-Thinking The Sunday Church Service - Series Re-Post

Several years ago I did an ongoing blog series titled Re-Thinking The Sunday Church Service.  I took it down last year for reasons I won't go into here, but I've decided to re-post this series as I think it is relevant to what I'm still writing about.  This series was key in my development of how I view the church meeting on Sunday and what I think the bible says about it.  I looked at the church service as most Americans have come to know it and compared it with what I see in the bible.  This was just one of my ongoing "Re-Thinking" blog series from the last five years.

The link provided above will take you to the group of posts that made up the series, but starting soon (maybe tomorrow) I will re-post each part of the series individually every few days until the entire series (all 14 parts as of my last series post) has been re-posted.  I invite you to join along in reading each post as it comes out, and I'd love to hear your comments.

Blog Spotlight Monday - A Few Thoughts

I'm not linking to a blog today to spotlight.  However, I wanted to throw out a few thoughts on some of the blogs I will highlight in the next few weeks, and over time in this series.  I'm going to link to some that I don't "agree" with, or am not on the same page as.  Some of them I regularly follow, and even link to in my blogroll, but they are more there for me to keep a pulse on certain types of thinking or what's going on over in another theological world.  Maybe those blogs are about how I used to think.  Sometimes I comment on those blogs to poke the hornet's nest as it were.  I'll give a brief explanation to why I read them, and maybe point out a few disagreements I have with them.  All in all, I'm not necessarily endorsing them, it's just that they keep me sharp in my beliefs as to why I might disagree with certain views.  For what it's worth.  I should be back to highlighting blogs next week.

On Doubts and Questions

Do you have doubts about God?  Or about the message(s) of Christianity?  Do you sometimes wonder where God is, or why you can't seem to find him?  Do you have questions about any of these things?  Do you question your own faith sometimes?

If I look back over my life - or look at it even right now! - I would have to say that certainly I have had doubts and questions.  Many of them.  To what degree, about what, or for how long is a different matter.  Yet doubts and questions have existed.  I think if any of us are honest, we would probably say the same thing.  I am of the opinion that doubts and questions about our own religious faith are normal to some extent.  But what I want to do here is look at how doubts and questions are dealt with by categories of people.

There seems to be a group of people, let's say from the post-modern/emergent type of view, that have many doubts and questions.  Doubts and questions about God, Christianity, and even the major doctrines of historical Christianity.  Then there are the people, let's say from a more fundamentalist or conservative type of view, that have no doubts or questions about anything.  They have rock solid certitude about what they believe in, and doubts and questions are considered the enemy of faith.  Then there are those in the middle who have a certain amount of solid belief, yet have doubts and questions.

To categorize in a general sense, the first group I mentioned seem to err on the side of glorying in their doubting and questioning.  It's hip or cool to doubt God or to question Christianity.  Questions are asked and doubts are raised, but there seems to be no answers to the questions or assurances that solve the doubts.  The next group are so certain about themselves that they view anybody who has any doubts or questions with contempt.  The middle group aren't afraid to ask questions, but seek to have those questions and doubts answered.

Reflecting on these groups using statements about belief, the middle group could be represented by, "Lord, I believe; help thou my unbelief."  The first group could be represented by, "Lord, I doubt and question.  Look how genuine I am!"  The second group could be represented by, "Lord, I believe.  Judge those who have unbelief."

Friday Night Potpourri

Holy week, or week of holiness?

• Our third grader did the "egg drop" science project this week.  He schemed up a cube-shaped Kleenex box filled with cotton balls and attached to a parachute and helium balloons.  Dropped from the top of the school gym, the egg didn't break.  Doing trial runs from our own roof allowed me to clear off all the small toys up there.
• Some in-laws dropped by this week in what to our kids was a surprise visit.  Our kids and theirs always have different Easter weeks off so we can never plan big things to do together.  Well, playing basketball and going to the creek were great for a few hours, and a weeping willow switch is a great toy for a three year old.
• Spring is in full bloom here in California.  Although there's no snow, we get plenty of blossoms falling to make it look like it in my neighborhood.
• We've got some really messy pine trees in our yard.  At least I think they're pine trees.  They drop huge clouds of pollen all at once, and the tiny, wispy cone things fall and make a mess all over.  Rain makes it worse. 
• I've got some blue towels from 1988.  Yes, that old.  We use them as scrunge towels to clean things up and to lay down on certain surfaces so they won't get messy.  The 80's are still with us!
• I tried some pine nut flavored hummus this week.  Pretty good.  Reminds me of Euell Gibbons commercials for Grape Nuts cereal back in the 70's.  "Ever ate a pine tree?  Many parts are edible."
• Whatever you make of the title is your business I guess.  Happy holy weekend.

Friday Good

And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit."  Having said this, He breathed His last.  Luke 23:46

Jesus here quoted Psalm 31:5 when he said, "into your hands I commit my spirit."  It is interesting that he did not commit his body to the Father.  Rather, his body was buried in a tomb, to be resurrected on the third day.  Even Jesus, the Son of God had a dead body, just like the rest of humanity, and was buried just like the rest of humanity.  And He would be resurrected at a later time, just like the rest of humanity.  Jesus shared in our life, death and tribulations.  Things man had always experienced.  But He led the way in being resurrected, because unlike us, we have no power over death.  So, as we remember His death today, we also await the resurrection.

We Need A Holiday for The Return of Christ

Dan Allen at the Ekklesia in Southern Maine writes a post about missing what it really means for Christ to come back.  We get caught up in the eschatological schemes we dream up but miss the main point. He makes the point that we're thinking about his death and resurrection this week and urges us to think about his return as well.

This got me to thinking about all the religious holidays we have to remember various events in Christ's life and death here on earth.  The biggies that come to mind are Christmas, Palm Sunday, Good Friday and Easter.  If we're missing out on the real meaning of his return, why not have a holiday to remind us?  I mean, it doesn't have to be on the exact calendar date of his return - nobody but Harold Camping knows what that day is anyway - just like Christmas is not likely the actual date of Jesus' birth.  We could call it "Return Day."  We could have a special church service on that day to celebrate His coming.  If it's on a Sunday, maybe it would be instrumental in getting nominal church goers to increase their obligatory attendance by 50% by adding Return Day to Christmas and Easter.  All the various traditions of historic Christianity could celebrate it and it wouldn't be a denominational thing.  Maybe the Eastern Orthodox could celebrate it one week before or after the rest of us, but that's a matter of church debate.  :-)

In any case, I'm up for it.  Maybe we all could vote on it at our next church membership meeting.  [Disclaimer:  this is not taking Dan's post less seriously.  I like his post, but it made me take a leap in logic to somewhere slightly on the humorous side.]

The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church

The Internet Monk website has long displayed a gadget linking to Rod Rosenbladt's The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church on his New Reformation Press site.  "The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church" is a message to those people who converted to Christianity once upon a time, but who have become either "sad" or "mad" because the church has presented them with an unattainable or impossible paradigm for living the Christian life.  Many people have been broken by their church and its teachings and might have even left the church altogether.  Rosenbladt's message is that these people aren't beyond hope, and gives some basics about the gospel that counter much of the problematic methodology out there.

It can be used by either those broken by the church or by people who disire to minister to them.  I only recently read/watched it, and I think it may be of some good use.  I've seen this link up for a long time now, and it used to cost a few dollars, which is the reason I never used it.  It is now free.  You can either watch it on the site or download an .mp3 or read it in .pdf format, or both as I did.  The video is about 47 minutes long and the PDF is just over 20 pages.  Check out Rod Rosenbladt's The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church.

Blog Spotlight Monday - Islam and Christianity

Abu Daoud blogs at Islam and Christianity.  Abu is a Christian who lives in the Middle East among Muslims and he is active in engaging Muslims in discussions of Islam and Christianity.  Abu Daoud is not his real name, but it is what is known as a filionym which is commonly used in some Muslim countries.  When a man has his first son, he is given the name "Abu" plus "son's name."  His first son's name translated into Arabic is "Daoud," so his filionym is "Abu Daoud."

Islam and Christianity is a fascinating blog because it looks at Islam as a religion, Islam as a political system, and the interrelation of Islam and Christianity as it occurs in the Middle East.  Many helpful insights are noted, and there are often stories of his interaction with Muslims.  Abu also sprinkles in some commentary of news events in the Arab world, and gives a number of looks at the history of Islam (and Christianity) as well as the writing of and content of the Quran.

Abu has given the better part of a decade to the study of Arabic and Islam.  He also discusses the roles of the major Christian traditions in the Middle East, which are Protestantism, Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.  Islam and Christianity is a must read for people who are considering mission work in the Islamic world, and either way is a good read for those with even a mild interest in Islamic religion and culture.  Please give Abu Daoud's Islam and Christianity a read.

Does "all" Really Mean ALL? (2)

...not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.  2 Peter 3:9b

In my first post on this topic, I looked at 1 Corinthians 15:22.  Now for another "does all really mean all?" verse.  This verse has not only an "all" but an "any" as well.  It is quite clear from the absolute truth of the verse above - and it IS absolute truth because it is from the bible - that God doesn't wish for any person who ever lived to perish, and wants all people who would ever live to come to repentance.

This verse is a favorite proof texting verse of Arminians I've come across, and even one used often by Calvinists, to show that God wants everybody in heaven.  There's only one problem with using this verse like that.  It doesn't work.  That's because it has to be taken out of context in order for it to be used that way.  First, taking the immediate several-verse context:

But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.  The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.  2 Peter 3:8-9

Just as in the first post, the questions need to be asked, "all of WHAT?" and "any of WHAT?"  There's a clue in verse 9.  "...but is patient toward YOU, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance."  So taking the context of YOU, the meaning of the verse can be narrowed to "...but is patient toward you, not wishing for any [of you] to perish but for all [of you] to come to repentance."  And just who are the you that Peter is writing to?  Chapter 3, verse 1 gives us further information:  "This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you in which I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder..."  Here, Peter is writing to a "beloved" group of people.  The letter of 2 Peter opens with the following:  "Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:"  So the "you" Peter is writing to is those who have received a faith of the same kind as Peter's.  So, returning to the verse I'm looking at, we can substitute this as follows:

But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved [you who have the same kind of faith as Peter and to whom he is writing], that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you [to whom Peter is writing who have the same kind of faith as Peter], not wishing for any [of you to whom Peter is writing and who have the same kind of faith as Peter] to perish but for all [of you to whom Peter is writing and who have the same kind of faith as Peter] to come to repentance. 2 Peter 3:8-9

So, taking this verse in context it becomes clear that it cannot be used as a proof text to support Arminian or Calvinist theology, but simply relates to Peter's readers that God didn't want any of them to perish, but for all of them to come to repentance.

Friday Night Potpourri

Three hundred sixty five divided by fifty two:

• Well, yeah, I know, all you math freaks, there is a remainder because it doesn't divide exactly.
• Every day we walk by a row of fruitless mulberry trees.  All the switches were pruned off this winter, and the trees look like they have a bunch of large stubs with numerous knobs attached.  It is from these that new switches grow.  Right now single or small clumps of leaves are growing out of the stumpy branches.  Our three year old started laughing and asked what kind of trees they were.
• Weeds, weeds, weeds.  Tons of rain produce many weeds.  I'm sure glad I have a pair of pretty good knee pads.  They're especially great for kneeling in the rocks.
• Occasionally I see an odd pickup truck around town.  It's like a Dodge from the 60's and it looks like the cab is a mini-van cut short, with a slightly different pickup bed in the back.  Some of you might know what I'm talking about.  It is painted all red, white and blue with stars on it, and it really sticks out when you see it.  Well, last weekend it was in the opening day parade of our six year old's baseball league.  I guess the coach of the Pirates drives it as he turned the bed into a pirate ship and drove backward through the parade with the kids on the team in back - er, uhm, front.  Now I know.
• I've been on Google Satellite quite a bit lately for numerous reasons.  One is that I'm looking for work, and the satellite image actually helps out somewhat in looking.  I think you can learn a lot from Google Satellite.  I don't have Google Earth loaded, so I'm a step behind the rest of the world.  I wonder what technology will allow us ten years from now?  Sometimes it's scary to think about.
• Why is the moon out during the day?  That's something that little kids might ask.  They've been taught their whole short lives that the moon is out at night.  In the sky when the sun isn't there.  In pictures, books, and the like.  So how do you answer a small child this question?  I could explain it to an astronomy class, but a three year old?
• Like, I mean, what else am I gonna link to today?

Just What Exactly Is "Ethnic Israel" or an "Ethnic Jew"?

I've heard a lot about "ethnic Jews" and "ethnic Israel" when eschatology is discussed.  But exactly what are these terms and what do they mean?  What is meant by "ethnic?"  A dictionary definition seems to include genetic ideas, but doesn't mandate them.  Is an "ethnic" Jew a physical descendant of Abraham?  Or merely a religious one?  Yes, biological descendants of Abraham are Jews, but Abraham's servants and any other servant who embraced Judaism and was circumcised was considered a Jew.  Ruth was a Moabitess, but I look at her as a Jew because of her identification.  And if what I've heard is not mistaken, there was no small debate when the current artificial geo-political nation state of "Israel" decided to allow "Jews" to settle within their boundaries a few decades ago.  Any ideas?

Blog Spotlight Monday - Vache Folle

Vache Folle blogs at St George Blog.  His is one of the first blogs I read regularly so many years ago.  I don't know his real/birth name, as he writes with a pseudonym, Vache Folle.  Do I need to know his name?  He's a character from the keyboard, a self-proclaimed libertarian/anarchist.  He is an attorney and attends a Dutch Reformed church in the New York area, and writes many opinions on religion and politics, with a bit on legal issues surrounding children.  He is originally from the deep South and moved to the New York area many years ago.  He uses a pen name out of worries about his job, and blogs out of a sense of belonging to community.

One of the best of flavors that comes from his blog is his skillful ability to write anonymously about anonymous - but real in real life - people.  Aside from occasionally naming public figures, his subjects are the people next door, in the carpool, at work and as he comes across them, but without names.  Candid talk.  His terms for describing people are also colorful.  He uses "conspecifics" to describe co-workers or co-carpoolers, and "co-religionists" to identify fellow church goers.  He practices laughing at himself, and others, and is constantly engaging in slapstick sociology. He loathes mindless, sheepist conformism, and knows well his place on the Bristol Stool Chart.  His anonymity also allows him to post some very personal stuff, but there always seems to be some underlying humor in it.

VF is refreshing to read for me as he is almost his own unique literary genre in and of himself.  I know some people have issues with internet anonymity, but I'm a fan of his nonetheless.  Maybe almost in spite of the issues.  Vache Folle's St George Blog can be found by clicking your mouse, old school or wireless, here on this underlined hyperlink.

What Does A Bishop Oversee?

Alan Knox at The Assembling Of The Church re-posts one of his own all-time favorite posts, What Does A Bishop Oversee?  He asks whether an "overseer" should oversee an organization or oversee people.  He shows from some bible passages that shepherds are supposed to be concerned for people first of all.  Alan brings this from the heart of an overseer because he is an elder in the church he assembles with.  To my mind, a church whose overseers neglect its people or allow oversight of the organization get in the way of putting people first is fairly useless and to be avoided [Update: your own approach may differ, and I'm fine with that].  Along with Alan, I would have overseers choose people every time.  Read Alan's post here.

Friday Night Potpourri

Week of spicy food:

• A friend from my school gave me some very hot peppers.  Perfect for taco night tonight.
• For some reason I've been putting hot sauce in most of my food this week.  I wonder what the craving is about.
• In just a few days we went from wearing shorts in 80+ degree weather to hail, iced windows and snow on the hills and mountain.  Spring is so difficult to predict.
• It was Opening Day in my parts, and the Giants got to hoist their championship flag.  Going to a game will never be the same.
• Okay, my third cell phone died in the last couple of months, the last one after only a week.  I tried everything with the carrier, and they were baffled, too.  I think I narrowed it down to a bad charger, so they replaced it.  I hope that's it, because I really do need a phone.  Do you?
• I recently discovered that Google Maps lets you create your own custom maps.  So I decided to put it to use to chart all the locations of potential jobs.  Quite a tool that helped me apply for some of the best.
• And when the fog horn blows I want to hear it.

Get With The Program

There have been a few times that I (or others, from a sermon, etc.) have been told to "get with the program."  The church program, that is.  But that raises a question.  What if the program, and not my lack of getting with it, is the real problem?  What if I can't get with the program?  What if the program is ungetwithable by somebody like me?  What then?  Maybe there shouldn't be a program like that.  And what if there is a program I could actually get with, but don't really think the program is right to begin with?  Can I get out of the program?  Why?  Why not?  Just some thoughts late on a Thursday night.

Blog Spotlight Monday - grain edit

I'm taking a bit of a detour tonight on Blog Spotlight Monday.  Tonight's blog has nothing to do with church or theology.  Tonight I am highlighting a blog titled grain edit, a blog devoted to modern graphic design.  One of the main contributors to this blog is named Dave, and although I've met him only a few times, he's a friend of many friends of mine.  grain edit focuses on a certain era of graphic design (as distinguished from modern art), what one might call "classic," from the 1950's to the 70's.  Examples of the best of this era of design (with maybe some retro tossed in) are continually shown.

Graphic design of one form or another has been part of my life for many years, especially with my previous career in the field of architecture.  Many of the features within this genre of design have been very visible in all of our lives in the form of advertising, book covers, album covers, public signs, children's cartoons, etc.  Dave and crew do an outstanding job of putting this genre on display, and grain edit has won an award for being a top design site on the web.  I agree with the award givers.

Check out grain edit, even if you aren't particularly drawn to modern graphic design, and you might actually grow to enjoy it.  Maybe check out a few back pages with older posts to gain an overall view of their work.  Next week I'm probably back to a normal theology/ecclesiology theme.

Belated Opening Day Post

I usually post something about the start of the baseball season, me being a big fan and all, but important things took up my blogging week.  So, as of two days ago, it's baseball season again!  My team won it all last year, and of course I'm looking for them not only to repeat, but threepeat.  I think it's about time.  But even if they don't, there's still baseball on the radio, available seats at the nearest ballpark, and seven more months of my favorite game.  You can read more from me about baseball over at my baseball blog, From the Bleachers.

Friday Night Potpourri

Uh-huh:

• It's school project time, and I recall my high school science project.  I made a contraption that would execute various bells and whistles and whatnot, and ultimately ignite a home-made fuse made with home-made gun powder, the ingredients for which I easily picked up at the local chemical supply warehouse.  I called it "The Time Bomb."  Of course it only went as far as lighting a fuse.  If I were in high school and tried that today, I'd be in Gitmo faster than you could say "boom."
• This morning I went out into the back yard to kick the dog and suddenly remembered we didn't have a dog.
• I picked the worst day of the year to be out of beer.  So, excuse me while I slip out to the store.
• Okay, back from the store.  Some guy cut me off and I'm glad my kid's bat was still in my car from baseball practice.  I hope nobody got my plate numbers.
• For dinner one night this week, I dumped a bunch of hot sauce on my mashed potatoes and gravy.  I would recommend this to every red-blooded American.  Or Canadian, for that matter.
• My "free" forced upgrade phone died within a week after I got it, then my second one died after only ten weeks.  The third one is having issues, too.  Phone curse?
• I really wanted to link to some Marilyn Manson for a good example of grown-up evangelical music, but I chickened out at the last minute and pasted this instead.
• [Update: yeah, some of my above bullet points are wacky.  Twisted April Fool humor, I guess]

Blog Spotlight Monday - Independent Country

James Leroy Wilson blogs at Independent Country.  His was one of the first blogs I read regularly, and for good reason.  He was what was known as a "libertarian."  His writings were key in helping me change my views that were based on the false dilemma that one had to be either a "conservative" or a "liberal."  I was beginning to discover that there were other ways of looking at things.  Although James has written mostly about political issues, I could see strong parallels in religious thinking.  James has written a great deal about using civil law to exercise power over people.  If there's a law, there's an armed police force willing to enforce that law (up to and including the use of lethal force), and a judge with a jail cell key to do as much.  There's something inherently wrong with using coercion in forcing one's beliefs upon another.  He has written much about the force used by the state for its own goals and about how our personal desires fit in to that system.  I have changed my political and religious views in some areas because of some of what he has written.

I recently discovered something I wrote about James years ago and I thought I'd repost it here:

James is... I'm not even sure what James does, but he brings a libertarian angle to things that has been for me a constant check to my previously held conservative ideas. James is refreshing because he hasn't become a libertarian broken record, and isn't afraid at all to call other libertarians to the mat on certain issues. He doesn't have a one track mind when it comes to politics, and his wide variety of topics and several other websites makes him constantly interesting. The next time I'm knowingly within a hundred miles of him, I'll try to buy him lunch.

Wilson has changed his writing quite a bit over the last couple of years.  He has other political writing projects, and has switched to writing much via Facebook.  So his Independent Country blog is mostly about linking to his other writing projects.  I think the "older posts" link at the bottom of his page might even be broken, but there are still some links to old stuff in the posts I wrote that fall under my James Leroy Wilson label.  [Update: I missed Wilson's blog archives being a single line drop-down bar in the right-hand margin]

James Leroy Wilson is always an interesting read, even if you disagree with him.  He is a good writer and has a talent for being able to explain his views.

Does "all" Really Mean ALL? (1)

For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.  1 Corinthians 15:22

Here's one of those controversial "does all really mean all?" verses.  Just looking at it, it's easy to come to a conclusion.  If all who ever lived die in Adam - and this is true - then all who ever lived will be made alive in Christ.  Right?  Not so fast.  What do you mean, Steve?  Aren't you changing the scope of the word "all" right in the middle of a sentence?  Well, this is obviously a proof-text for universalism, and Arminians will claim that of course only those "all" who choose Christ will be made alive, and Calvinists will claim that of course only those "all" for whom Christ died from the foundations of the world will be made alive.

But the key to all of the "all" verses (and yes, I do mean ALL!), and the other similar verses like the "any" verse, is not to ask the question "does all really mean all?"  The key is to ask, "all of WHAT?"  Because the word "all" - just like any other word - has a context.  And the context doesn't always mean that "all" should mean "all" of everything.  Sometimes it means merely "all" of something.  Let me give an example.  Let's say there was a party and everybody was (or all were) there.  Was everybody there?  Was the Queen of England there?  Was every last plumber from Fiji there?  No, because the context is a sales associates party in Walla Walla, Washington, we would come to see that everybody who is somebody in sales in Walla Walla was the group of people who were there.  And this is why we could say, "everybody was there!"  Everybody of the Walla Walla sales area, that is.  The context is understood.  Contexts create limitations on their contents.  So it is with bible language, and why anybody could expect otherwise is a really good question.

So back to the 1 Corinthians verse.  The verse above is in a context.  The context is mainly the chapter, 1 Corinthians 15.  The word "all" has a context.  We need to ask, "all of what?"  Starting in verse 1, we immediately see to whom Paul is speaking: believers.  Now I make known to you, brethren [believers], the gospel which I preached to you [believers], which also you [believers] received, in which also you [believers] stand...  Then we can go through the rest of the passage and see that all the references Paul makes in his arguments are to believers in Christ:

After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren [believers] at one time, most of whom [believers] remain until now, but some [believers] have fallen asleep;  v 6

For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your [believers'] faith is worthless; you [believers] are still in your sins.  Then those [believers] also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.  If we [believers] have hoped in Christ in this life only, we [believers] are of all men most to be pitied. vv 16-19

But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those [believers] who are asleep.  For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead.  vv 20-21

And now here's where I think special attention should be given.  Although it is true that "all" men who ever lived die in Adam, it is also true that all believers who ever lived die in Adam.  I think all of the believers is what Paul means in both halves of this verse.  Let's look at the verse in question with regard to believers:

For as in Adam all [believers] die, so also in Christ all [believers] will be made alive.  v 22

And finally:

But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those [believers] who are Christ's at His coming  v 23

In this context, I think it is clear that the words "all" in verse 22 mean "all" of the believers and not "all" who ever lived, believers and non-believers alike.  It would be strange for Paul to change the scope of "all" in the first part of just one verse and make it stand apart from the rest of the passage in making his point.  In conclusion I think it is safe to say that 1 Cor. 15:22 cannot be used as a proof text for universalism, Arminianism or Calvinism.  It doesn't deny them specifically, but it just doesn't prove them.  Figuring out the context of the passage and keeping it as constant as the author does is quite helpful in interpreting the passage.

Friday Night Potpourri

A week of bland food:

• Having the flu means not eating for a few days.  Pizza with lots of ground red peppers isn't good to eat when you have the flu.  And that's why I didn' do that.  Normally I would.
• We've had so much rain recently, all of our son's pee-wee practices and games have been cancelled for the last two weeks.
• The filter went out on the frog tank, and the green stuff grew in on the side real quick like.  Our son etched the word "clean" in the algae.
• A "sure fire" cure for sinus blockage is taking hot sauce straight out of the bottle.  For those of you who can handle the hot stuff, I highly recommend this treatment.  It's quick acting, too.
• I love a good Indian curried lentil dish.  We've got some of those packaged meals, and though they're not quite four-star restaurant quality, they're pretty good.
• I'd really love to dive into a household improvement project, but that's on hold for an indefinite period of time.  I miss taking my boys to the hardware store and looking for daddy stuff.
• Check out how "Young" he looks.  LOL  He might even be as old as 16 here.

To Lie Down

I think it's time to lie down.  Get some rest.  It was a long week of school, finals, trying to apply for jobs, and being sick with the flu.  Oh, and not blogging.  My next big blogging adventure, or attempt at it, will be the regular Friday Night Potpourri feature.  I'll let you know if I get around to posting that.  On second thought, maybe I won't.  You'll know one way or another.

Blog Spotlight Monday - Alan Knox

Alan Knox blogs at a spot on the web known as The Assembling of the Church.  As you might be able to guess from the blog's title, Alan spends much of writing time devoted not to just the church, but the assembling of it.  Ecclesiology is Alan's main topic.  I discovered Alan's site just over two years ago, while in the process of writing an ongoing blog series about re-thinking the Sunday worship service.  Alan had some striking parallels to mine in discovering from examples in the bible (namely 1 Corinthians) that church meetings were not sermon-centered, but were structured so that all who assembled were able to participate in the edification of others.  As such, Alan's blog falls into my category of major blog influences.

Alan is a pastor (one of several) at a church in the Raleigh, North Carolina area.  The church he assembles with practices the mutual edification type of meeting that he writes about.  While I developed my ecclesiology from reading about the church in the New Testament and comparing it to what I had experienced over 15 years, Alan develops his ecclesiology "hands on" in addition.  On his blog, Alan routinely gives examples of how his own church lives out their lives in Christ.  He has quite a few other blogs he links to that represent his understanding of ecclesiology, so getting a wide angle on the participatory style of meeting is always possible.

Alan is also a PhD student at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and is working on his thesis with the subject of mutual edification as the purpose for church assembling.  I find Alan to be engaging, thoughtful, and he is one who regularly interacts with those who comment on his blog.  He started blogging (actually today is coincidentally his five year blogiversary) as an outlet for the things he was studying in his PhD program.  For anybody who has questions about the nature, function and structure of the church, I would heartily recommend Alan's The Assembling of the Church blog.

Does "all" Really Mean ALL?

There's an ongoing debate about passages in the bible that use the word "all" - or other similar words like "any" - over the scope of the word.  Does "all" really mean all?  Does God desire all people to be saved?  Does God want any people to perish?  All die in Adam, but all are made alive in Christ.  Uhm, all?  What does "all" mean here?  Does all really mean all, or should the meaning of the word be altered or modified because of somebody's pet theology figured out elsewhere in the bible and placed over the top of the word in a particular passage?

It seems like universalists have a tendency to take the word all and make it look like all people are going to be saved.  And it seems like the Arminians have a tendency to take the word all and make it look like God made it possible for all people to be saved, but of course not all will.  And it seems like the Calvinists have a tendency to take the word all and make it look like God will save all...all of his elect people, that is.

I'd like to look at some of these passages that use these kinds of words in upcoming posts and try to figure out what these words actually mean.  I believe there is a way to figure out the meanings of all and any in those debated passages, and I'd like to offer my ideas.  Stay tuned for all future From the Pew posts.

Friday Night Potpourri

I had tons of stuff for this week, but forgot most of it.  Let's see if I can remember:

• Strong winds dropped tons of yellow pollen from some kind of evergreen tree onto my car.  As I drove out of the driveway, I could see the pollen blow off in patterns.  There was a whirlpool effect on the back window.  Pretty cool, except for my kid's allergies.
• I was far too busy with stuff to write a post about St. Patrick's Day.  So, I hope you had a good one, and if you enjoyed corned beef, cabbage, potatoes and a Guinness it must have been a good day.
• All the nuke talk makes it easy to forget there was an earthquake and tsunami.  As usual, the most graphic, and telling, videos are the home movies on the internet and not the major media clips.  Just to see a surge of water going up hill, taking cars and houses with it is unfathomable.  It defies all sense of normalcy as well as the training of the senses.  A real disaster.
• We keep getting rain.  It keeps cancelling many of the pee-wee practices and games for our kid.  But it's come at times when he's been sick, too.  Wabbit season, flu season.  Wabbit season, flu season.
• Garlic flavored hummus.  Mmmmm.  Why wasn't that stuff around when I was a kid?
• Nope.  I forgot all the stuff I had lined up for this week's FNP.  Maybe some of it will come back later.  Until then...
• Edgar Allan Poe set to music.  It was difficult to pick which piece to play.

Top "From the Pew" Posts

I have added a link window to the right margin of this blog titled Top "From the Pew" Posts.  It is a mix of posts that have been widely read, widely linked to, highly commented on, and posts that I think are best or worthy of reading.  By far, my most widely read post ever is John MacArthur's Wine List, where I answer questions that pastor John MacArthur asks his listeners about in examining themselves with regard to biblical teaching on alcohol.  It was an old post that I recently re-posted.  When using a certain search engine, placing his name plus the beverage in question (or its active ingredient) in the search window lands it on the first page (it's been as high as second place, just behind the source I link to).  While other posts haven't been as widely read, I think they are representative of what I strive for in my writing.

So, meander on over to the margin and click on a few - or all - of them.  I should be adding a few more features to the layout of my blog in the coming weeks now that I have a new layout.

Blog Spotlight Monday - John Armstrong

The first several installations of Blog Spotlight Monday are going to be major blog influences of mine.  John Armstrong's blog is no exception.  I first came across John at a ministry conference of his in 1997 held at the church I attended at the time.  His ministry during that period was called Reformation and Revival.  I kept in occasional contact with him for several years, and then when I discovered him online after the internet revolution gained speed, we re-connected in a much stronger way.  John and I have had similar theological journeys, and I owe much to his writing and friendship over the last six years or so.

One thing that makes John stand out to me is his view of the church.  Both of us have had a history of a very elite, narrow minded view of the church from within the walls of conservative Calvinism.  I was taught early on that Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestant movements such as Arminianism and the Charismatic movement preached false gospels, and that to be a member of those churches (i.e. believed their doctrines) meant that you did not have salvation.  John now sees a greater vision of the church, and believes - as I have come to believe - that God places his believers, and many of them, within all the various historical Christian traditions.  John works to bridge the gaps between the various traditions as an earthly reality of Jesus' prayer in John 17 that we would all be one.

John believes and teaches what is known as "missional-ecumenism."  In his own words:  "Missional-ecumenism is a way of understanding two truths that clearly go together in Scripture and should in practice. The church is first, missional in that she is God's mission in the world, and the God who calls her is an eternally relational being, and second, ecumenical in that she is to be united in Christ and together in relationality as his mission."  John is also an ordained minister in the Reformed Church in America, the oldest continuous denomination in America.

John and I also share a strong love for the game of baseball.  He is a lifelong fan of the Braves (boo!) while I am a Giants faithful (yay!).  Please read his blog at John H Armstrong.

Children In Church?

Alan Knox at The Assembling of the Church has a good post on the presence and role of children in the gathered church, titled, Children as Part of the Church Gathering.  He discusses various aspects of having children with us adults as we meet together as the church.  For many, church is an entirely adult affair, with children never gathering with the assembly until the top age of Sunday school has been reached.  In this post, Alan looks at some practical implications as well as the ideas behind having children in church.  Please give it a read.

New From the Pew Design

Well, I've updated From the Pew to a modern Blogger template.  It's more powerful, both for me and the reader, and simpler to use.  I will no longer be limited to being able to read only 20 posts for any given label as just one example.  I'll no longer have to add the link to the post title clickthrough, so scheduled posting will be much easier.  New features allow me to, well, feature more and better things.  Readers can better use the "follow" feature more easily.

I also was able to design my own banner and background.  I like the Gothic arch and cross theme, as my previous career in architecture was helpful in developing this.  I carried it over into the font on the banner.  I hope you enjoy the new layout and design.  But more importantly, I hope you enjoy reading From the Pew.

Blog Construction Ahead

I may attempt to play with the template I have here on From the Pew.  This might be a construction zone for a little while.  Please be patient and stay tuned.  - Steve Scott

[Update:  The new layout, colors and all can be seen.  I'm still adding links and other things, so this is still a job in progress.  I will post when everything I want to do in this update actually occurs.]

Friday Night Potpourri

And then there were seven:

• I'm 47 years old.  Just this week, for the first time in my life, I had that religious cult famous for knocking on doors knock on my door.  First time ever.  I've had dozens of close calls, near misses and narrow escapes.  I've never answered that other cult either.  I was at home once, sick in bed, when that other cult came but somebody else in my apartment answered the door.  Another time when I was 15, I saw them coming up the street.  I ran and got my boom box and cranked some Ted Nugent.  They stopped next door and turned around and went back down the street.  Is 47 years without a religious group ever knocking on my door some kind of record?
• I got a haircut for the first time in many months.  I wonder if my new hat will be loose?
• Daylight Saving time starts in less than two days.  Spring starts in less than two weeks.  The baseball season starts in less than three weeks.  The first two don't matter much.
• It's still winter, but it really does seem to be warmer than it was in January.  The temperature vs. month graphs show this, but when you feel it's warm enough to sleep without any socks, it really is getting warmer.
• Our kids' school had movie night tonight.  Toy Story 3.  They had popcorn and lemonade.  Three bucks to get in.  Our youngest didn't go because he went to a birthday party during the same time period.  Star Wars (the original).  They had pizza and beer (uhhhh, for the adults, that is).  Get in for free.  Decisions, decisions.
• This one channel I watch shows the same ad over and over, month after month.  It really gets sickening.  If I complained about this ad... okay, I won't.  Some people live for that kind of stuff, though.  Eew.
• When the Lord gets ready, you gotta move.

Blog Spotlight Hiccup

Okay, two weeks in a row now I've failed to post a Blog Spotlight Monday post.  It's just been that kind of pairing of consecutive Mondays.  Maybe next Monday I'll have my next blog to highlight.  Or maybe I'll do it tomorrow instead this week.  No, wait.  Tomorrow is Friday, and I'll be doing Friday Night Potpourri.  Saturday or Sunday is too late, so maybe I'll really wait until Monday.  I'm simply not a fan of the calendar these days.

The Five and Five Reformed

There are often big battles fought in Reformedville over just who is really Reformed.  Many people who are Calvinists claim to be Reformed because they equate Calvinism with being Reformed.  Then there are people who claim that to be Reformed, one must hold to all the historical Reformed beliefs.  So Reformed Baptists really aren't Reformed because they don't sprinkle infants, etc., or so the argument goes.  All the same holds true for those claiming to be Calvinists.  Just how much do you have to agree with all of Calvin's writings to be considered a Calvinist?

I've thought of a helpful label to describe and differentiate a bit.  My label is "Five and Five" Reformed.  At a bare minimum, these are people who hold to the five points of Calvinism and the five solas of the Protestant Reformation.  This speaks even of some country bumpkin sovereign grace Baptist types, who, aside from their five and five, are really garden variety Baptists.

So anybody who holds to the five points and five solas I'll call "Five and Five" Reformed.

Not In The Bible Either, Rev. Sproul

A huge hat tip to Arthur Sido at The Voice Of One Crying Out In Suburbia for pointing out a post made by R.C. Sproul Jr. on the Ligonier Ministries website.  The title of Sproul Jr's post is "5 Things I'm Surprised I Can't Find In The Bible."  The title of Sido's post is "Make that six things" and you can use your imagination as to why.

Sproul Jr. lists five things that are relatively unclear in the bible.  They are: 1) Proper form of church government; 2) Proper form of a service of worship; 3) Proper form for preaching the word; 4) Proper way to move from single to married; and 5) More information on the incarnation and the Trinity.  But contained in Sproul's No. 1, Sido finds No. 6, with my emphasis added:

The Bible is crystal clear that women are not to rule in the church, and that we are to submit to the elders over us. See Hebrews 13 for the latter.  Thus the Reformers were correct to list discipline as a mark of the true church. If you are not under the authority of name-able specific elders, you are not part of the visible church and thus do not have a credible profession of faith. You should get under authority.

Sido has some choice things of his own to say about this, some of which I'll lift and place here:

It always bothers me and should always cause you to pay close attention when someone airily claims that a whole chapter of Scripture [Sido references Heb. 13 in his argument] supports the point they are making without attempting to engage in the text at all and you should especially be on guard when they make statements with enormous implications to your very salvation based on these sweeping generalities. The idea that if you are not a member of a “proper” local church with name-able elders who carry out church discipline that you don’t have a credible profession of faith is a dangerous and Scripturally untenable statement. It sounds sweet to the ears of those who embrace certain church traditions but to question the salvation of someone because they don’t cling to your ecclesiastical traditions is arrogant and prideful.

And he concludes with:

 

The lesson here is that just because someone refers to a passage of Scripture and is published by a famous ministry doesn’t mean you should just take them at their word, especially not when they are questioning the salvation of other Christians.

Now I want to bring up the point I was making in my previous post on Ezekiel 34.  God's sheep can be lost, scattered, dominated, sickly, diseased, broken, wandering and slaughtered all at the hands of shepherds who did not care properly for the sheep.  And God doesn't blame the sheep in that passage.  Many people today who aren't currently involved in a church, or maybe are but are minimally involved, or who even are completely involved but haven't "signed the dotted line" of the membership papers can all fall under the pronouncement of Sproul Jr. and others who believe similar things.  I love to hear Christians' testimonies and life stories.  It amazes me how many people - including devout pastors - have had short periods of time or even seasons of their lives without the kind of church involvement Sproul Jr. speaks about.  And for many of these people, myself included, having your spirituality, level of humility or even salvation continually questioned or doubted doesn't help the cause any.  Especially for those who are younger in the faith.  Men like Sproul Jr. need to stop the "my way or the highway" authority trip and see God's sheep for who they are.  God's.

Friday Night Potpourri

A week in the life:

• One morning this last week I had ice on my car windows and didn't have any water.  The kids and I breathed on the windows to melt enough ice in order to use the squeegee.  I wish I had a video.
• I've been in school for three semesters now, and I was rejected this week for a job in that field.  As I sat at the kitchen table doing homework, my six year old said, "Dad, you didn't get the job, so why are you still doing your homework?"
• I wore shorts and a t-shirt today.  Until just about dusk.  Then the sweatshirt went on.  I then went home and put the pants on and turned on the heater.  I usually wish it were October about this time of year, but I haven't had time to wish.
• Woke up, got out of bed, dragged a comb across my head.  No, wait, that's somebody else.  My hair's too short for a comb.  But I still need a haircut anyway.
• Woke up, got out of bed, woke the kids up, got them breakfast, took them to school, made breakfast for me and the youngest, checked email, exercised, ran errands, went to doctor, got gas, came home, cracked books, looked at homework, made lunch, picked kids up from school, saw six turtles on three rocks, gathered books, mom got home, went to school, worked on computer program, went to two classes, came home, blogged, went to bed.
• I just realized that I don't get out much.
• One of my few favorites from this last decade, and a good video to go with it.

My Flock, My Sheep, But Not My Shepherds

I'm giving the readers of this post a reading assignment.  Read Ezekiel 34.  If you don't have time, I'm providing the link to Ezekiel 34 here.  It's only one chapter, so even if you don't link here, read it sometime soon.  And even though I'm going to highlight an important portion of it and put it here, please read it in its entirety.

Then the word of the LORD came to me saying, "Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel.  Prophesy and say to those shepherds, 'Thus says the Lord GOD, "Woe, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the flock?  You eat the fat and clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fat sheep without feeding the flock. Those who are sickly you have not strengthened, the diseased you have not healed, the broken you have not bound up, the scattered you have not brought back, nor have you sought for the lost; but with force and with severity you have dominated them. They were scattered for lack of a shepherd, and they became food for every beast of the field and were scattered. My flock wandered through all the mountains and on every high hill; my flock was scattered over all the surface of the earth, and there was no one to search or seek for them."'"  Ezekiel 34:1-6

I think this sounds like a pretty good picture of today's church.  Would you agree?  Shepherds have lost the art of shepherding.  This is a pretty scathing indictment from God.  I stopped at verse 6, but his judgment starts in the next verse.  That's one reason you should read the entire chapter.  Another reason to read the whole thing is to gain a flavor of what God thinks of the characters involved.

You see, as I read through the entire chapter I noticed a peculiar thing.  God uses the first person possessive in referencing the sheep.  Four times I count God using the term "My sheep."  He uses the first person possessive in referencing the flock.  Eleven times I count God using the term "My flock."  Only once does God use the term "My shepherds."  It is in verse 8, but it is not pretty, saying, "...My shepherds did not search for My flock..."  at that point he ceases using the term "My shepherds" and doesn't use it again the rest of the chapter.

I think this passage is important in the light of the now popular teaching among the celebrity rock star pastors in the "Reformed" world.  This teaching says that anybody who claims to be a Christian but is not a formal member of a church, or is not currently attending a church or is not under the direct authority of some kind of pastor is a great sinner at least, and probably not even a true believer.  Well for those who hold that kind of belief, I offer you Ezekiel 34.  How many of "My sheep" or "My flock" are spoken ill of by God in this chapter?  They are wandering, they are scattered, they are subject to wolves and other dangers.  How convenient for the shepherds of today to scatter and neglect the sheep, to dominate the sheep, to exalt themselves and then blame it on the sheep.  How convenient.

You Know Who You Are

You know who you are.  Yes, you.  You are the one who called me a few days ago when I needed a call.  Yes, that you.  And you know who you are.  And you over there, you know who you are, too.  I hope your wife gets better.  I'll send lawyers, guns and money.  And you half way in between, yeah, the guy who kinda knows what I was talking about, about people not loving each other.  I think you know who you are, too.  And everybody who doesn't know me well enough for me to have said "you know who you are" because of something you did, well, you know who you are as much as the next guy.  Or girl.

Then there are those who don't know who you are because I'm not making it clear, or you're not a reader of this blog.  I'll have a special post or two or three for you sometime soon.  Maybe you'll hear about it somehow and you'll know who you are too.  But if you don't, I'll be able to get away with writing about it because you won't know it's you, and neither will anybody else.  Sometimes it's more fun that way.

Wisdom, Fools and Gold

How much better it is to get wisdom than gold!  And to get understanding is to be chosen above silver.  Proverbs 16:16

I count 49 times that the word wisdom is used in the book of Proverbs.  It is used many more times in the bible.  Wisdom is so much more important than mere knowledge - or gold and silver.  Wisdom is the ability to take knowledge and apply it to a given situation or to many different situations.  It is essential for life, and it is essential for eternal life.  Fools despise wisdom (Prov. 1:7).
 
Wisdom does not see the world in black and white.  It doesn't see Scripture in black and white.  It realizes nuance.  It takes differences into account.  It treats similar situations differently.  It requires constant thinking and judging of circumstances.  It treats fools in different ways:
 
Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will also be like him.  Answer a fool as his folly deserves, that he not be wise in his own eyes.  Proverbs 26:4-5
 
Wisdom does not buy into a one-size-fits-all mentality.  It does not reduce life to formulas.  It results in different strategies and ministries.  Those results can even appear to be polar opposites:
 
For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, "He has a demon!"  The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, "Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!"  Yet wisdom is vindicated by all her children.  Luke 7:33-35
 
One of the reasons I have such a problem with fundamentalist type of thinking is that it often sets wisdom aside for a broad brush stroke in black and white.  Nuance is ignored and is often accused of being an excuse for not doing things "the biblical way," whatever way they think that happens to be.
 
Solomon forsook gold to gain wisdom, and God gave him both.  May God's people pursue wisdom.

Friday Night Potpourri

Ahhh!

• Juxtaposition:  Bob at Wilderness Fandango posted a Facebook update showing a photo of fresh snowfall in Maine.  Nobody else but me could see, but on my Facebook page the post directly above it (SF Giants fan page) showed Tim Lincecum throwing the first pitch of the first spring training game in Arizona.  Snow in Maine vs. heat in Arizona.
• Childhood:  Earlier today, I attended the memorial service of the next door lady from my childhood.  They moved away when I was a teenager, so most of my memories of here were from childhood.  Most of the dozen or so kids on the street lived there for many years.  A good number were at the service.  I got to see many old neighborhood friends.  I can still remember Mrs. M's laugh, calling her kids in for dinner and their front door sound when it shut.  But what I remember most is the way she called the cat in when she put the cat dish on the porch.  In a high falsetto voice, she called, "heeeeeere, kitty-kitty-kitty-kitty!"  She did it better than anyone ever.
• Speaking of snow, it's supposed to snow here tonight in just a few hours.  Snow in the San Francisco area at sea level comes once every decade or two.  If it does snow tonight, it will be several times in the last five years.
• A couple of weeks ago, I drove almost ten miles with the parking brake on.  I realized my mistake, and disengaged the brake.  When I arrived home and opened the door, I got a strong sense of that smell where brakes are too hot or burning.  Yeah, I guess so.
• Big little day tomorrow.  Get to pick up the pee-wee uniforms.  What number is he gonna be this year?
• I've been leaving my jacket in the car so I have it with me when it gets really cold.  It doesn't take long for my heater to warm up.
• I've long held this to be my favorite on the album.  In an interview, Carlos had the same view.  Not sure what's up with the imagery in this one, but it's the only clip I could find of the studio version.

Job Did Not Sin

Through all this Job did not sin nor did he blame God...In all this Job did not sin with his lips...Then they sat down on the ground with him for seven days and seven nights with no one speaking a word to him, for they saw that his pain was very great.  Job 1:22, 2:10, 2:13

I'm guessing that when most of us experience great tragedy or trouble, we all sin in some way.  But, here's an account of a man who did not sin, either in action or word.  But Job was extremely undone.  He sat in a pile of ashes at least a week.  I'm guessing he didn't to much of anything productive sitting there.  He was in great pain and it was great enough for everybody to notice.

But he did not sin.  Isn't it interesting that a picture of somebody paralyzed by life's tragedies is said to have not sinned?  I'm wondering what kind of counseling Job would have received if he lived today.  Would it have been the same?  Would he have been rebuked?  Maybe this story would have been the same no matter when in history it occurred.

Church Terminology and Definitions

Here are some common Christian terms and their definitions:

• Denominational:  The showing of unity in dividing from others.
• Non-denominational:  (1) Being so opposed to denominational division that one is willing to divide from all other churches over the issue (2) A handy misleading label that can be used when being so denominational that there are no other churches that agree with you (3) A denomination consisting of only one church
• Narthex:  Something everybody knows what it is but can't give a definition for
• Fellowship Hall:  Room where cookies and punch are served
• Sermon Length:  (historical) The length in time of one side of a blank cassette tape
• Pot Luck:  A large meal shared by Arminians where each participant brings a dish, the contents being unknown to others until the time of the meal
• Pot Providence:  A large meal shared by Calvinists where each participant brings a dish, the contents being unknown to others until the time of the meal
• Benediction:  Lunch time
• Bible Belt:  The area of the US where people are most likely to carry a bible and demand that the rest of society obey it while simultaneously least likely to follow what is written therein
• Supralapsarianism:  Us
• Infralapsarianism:  Them
• Pew:  Medieval torture device from which Steve Scott writes

Blog Spotlight Monday - Internet Monk

I am starting off this weekly series with a big name and one of my special and most influential blogs.  The late Michael Spencer's blog, Internet Monk, or iMonk as it's known.  Michael's subtitle captures a dominant flavor of what iMonk is all about: Dispatches from the Post-Evangelical Wilderness.  You see, Michael came to see over time that mainstream American evangelicalism had abandoned its roots, forsaken its essential doctrines and practices, and put anything and everything in its place - from wacky fads to aberrant teachings - to the detriment of its adherents.  More importantly, Michael noticed over time that the crisis within evangelicalism wreaked havoc with the faiths of professing Christians.  Many of these Christians reluctantly lived with their resulting stunted growth, left evangelicalism for other Christian traditions, left the church altogether, or even left the faith entirely.  His experience with teaching and pastoring helped him see these problems in a clear way, and saw himself as a "post-evangelical" who was living in a wilderness.  His was always a call to point out evangelicalism's problems and to give some measure of comfort to those who knew what the problems were but had no way to solve or act against them. 

Michael started his blog in the early days of internet technology which probably helped lead to its success.  His is one of the top Christian blogs on the net.  Michael enjoyed one of the most diverse audiences on the web, and the legions of commenters over the years bear that out.  He constantly looked to those who held other views and traditions to write for him at iMonk.  Many of evangelicalism's problems could be more easily seen from those outside the circles.  A few years ago, Michael announced that he had a book deal going and that he was going to write about his experiences with the church in a book to be titled Mere Churchianity, a takeoff of CS Lewis' book title Mere Christianity.  Late in 2009, he told his readers that something wasn't right with his health and later revealed that he had terminal cancer.  He passed in April of 2010, after completing his book but before its release.  He left the keeping of his website to several trusted friends, who have continued his legacy for almost a year now.  Although now most of the writing is done by Chaplain Mike Mercer, Jeff Dunn and others, plenty of classic Michael Spencer posts are re-posted to keep his spirit present.

I started reading iMonk after noticing many other blogs that referenced that site.  I admit that often I didn't know what the fuss was about.  I had trouble figuring him and his site out.  But over time, I began to see.  I started commenting occasionally, tossing myself into the huge conversations that erupted after each post.  It was frustrating for a long time and it seemed that I had little to contribute, and received few replies, even from Michael.  But I kept commenting.  Then one day in 2009, I received a personal email from some dude named Michael Spencer.  Well, whaddya know?  I know a guy named Michael Spencer, over at the Internet Monk blog!  What a coincidence.  Then I read the email.  It was from him.  True to the way he was, he made me an offer I couldn't refuse.  For the first time, I am posting his short email in its entirety here:

Steve,

I've been reading your work for a while and I'm a fan. I want you to know that if you ever have anything you'd like to occasionally submit at Internet Monk [dot] com, I'd like to publish it. I'd like to see you have a wider audience. You're a good writer and we're on the same page about a lot of evangelicalism.

If interested, let's talk.

peace

Michael Spencer

It was an opportunity I felt I simply could not pass up.  I managed to get only an introductory guest post to him, which he published in May of 2009, as personal and family problems related to the economy prevented me from putting the time and heart necessary to continue writing occasionally for him before his untimely death.  As I re-read my intro piece, I am struck that my views on certain things have changed or mellowed over even such a short period of time.  All in all, I am greatly thankful for his ministry and wholly endorse Michael Spencer's blog, Internet Monk.

What Beliefs Are the Result of Faith?

If a man or woman has faith in Christ, what beliefs will result?  By beliefs, I mean what conclusions will that person's faith be?  Obviously - or maybe not to many people - there will be some kind of idea as to how that person became a Christian.  What kind of assurance will he have of that faith?  Will he spend his time pondering how that assurance works, or will he simply be assured and never give it much thought?  Or will he be assured at all?  What will his beliefs be concerning the church?  Of the bible?  Of stained glass windows?

How will his views of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit fit together, and in what proportions?  How about the death, burial and resurrection?  I'm sure there are some widely varying answers to these questions.  Will that make you any less of a Christian than I?  Any more a Christian?  What will I believe next year, or next decade because of belief today?  Will I be okay with it and will other people be okay with it?  Will God be okay with it?

Friday Night Potpourri

Seven days in the rain:

• It's been raining so much over the last few days, the driveway becomes a puddle about 15 feet by 3 inches deep.  The drain keeps clogging with leaves and other debris, and it's got to be manually cleaned several times per day.
• I found a couple of steaks defrosting in the fridge.  I wonder when we're gonna have those?
• Spent a lot of time recently looking for things.  Our kid's model paint.  Scissors.  Colored pens.  Clean laundry.  Hey, how did laundry get on this list?
• I've driven my car for almost three years now, and I've just discovered the speed control for the intermittent windshield wipers.  D'oh!
• One of our boys' pee-wee practices and events have been cancelled all week long.  The way it's raining, none of the kids will be ready for opening day.
• Winter storms this week.  Lots and lots of garbage cans blown around the streets.  The garbage truck driver had to do a lot more on garbage day.  Picking up cans that blew over just so he could let them be dumped into the truck.
• Brings back memories of the Red Album.  Mrs. Scott knows what I'm talking about.

Reformed Celebrities and Their Formulas for Success

Reformed rock stars.  No, I don't mean Alice Cooper.  I'm talking about the pastors, theologians and other experts that we in the Reformed world lift up to celebrity status.  And when people have celebrity status, the things they say become more important, more worthy of a listening ear, and, well, more correct.

Now, as is sometimes the case, I've been wanting to write this for quite some time, and somebody else posts something similar.  This triggers all the necessary tools into operation to create a blog post.  Much thanks to Eric Carpenter at A Pilgrim's Progress for posting The Reformed Tendency to Create Superstars.

Eric lists some names, and I'll list many of the same, plus more.  The Reformed celebrities to which I refer are John MacArthur, John Piper, RC Sproul, Michael Horton, Tim Keller, Mark Driscoll, Mark Dever.  These are general, overall celebrities.  There are other celebrities that have been given special status as experts in a specific field.  Jay Adams and Wayne Mack in the area of counseling.  Tedd Tripp is the child rearing expert.  Martha Peace on what you need to be an excellent wife.  Joshua Harris is the dating and courtship guru.  DA Carson on theology.  And all these celebrities have their groupies.  Now, I'm not necessarily blaming the celebrities here, as Jesus had plenty of groupies too.  You know, all those who followed him for the magic tricks and being fed the bread he pulled out of his hat?  He rebuked them for their idolatry.

One by-product of the celebrity hype is that their material on a subject can become a formula for godly living.  Or even the formula.  Many people, for example, hold Tedd Tripp's Shepherding A Child's Heart book to be the biblical model for child rearing.  I know this first hand.  When you've got a kid who doesn't fit the box people have made of Tripp's book, then you're the one who is failing as a parent.  Nevermind that your other kids are fine.  Nevermind the special circumstances your family has that prevents you from following his formula, his formula is the only way to achieve godly kids.  Unable to follow his formula?  Well, then just follow his formula!  You have no choice.  It doesn't matter how well you explain how your family can't fit the formula, the formula works, because it's biblical after all.  And you're not.  And you're told so every time your kid has a problem, because you didn't follow the formula.

One humorous story that should shed some light on this formula bit comes from a men's discipleship class I took at my church in the late 90's.  One of our books to read was on marriage, written by one of the Reformed celebrities.  The problem was that this book was written 25 years earlier, in the early 70's, and true to conservative tendencies, the author had a cultural view of things from several decades earlier.  So, in this book, gender roles from the 50's golden age of TV were being advocated as biblical.  Of course, the book made it home with the men, and their wives and wives-to-be read the book, too.  And there were some ticked off women.  Some of the advice to women on how to be a biblical wife were like making sure you have his pipe and slippers ready when he comes home from work to read the evening paper.  Practice putting your makeup on, because even though you're married you've got to do your best to keep your man.  And the best was advice to the young single woman.  College is a great place to meet your man, so enroll, ladies, and get your Mrs. degree!  All this gave us some big laughs, as even by conservative standards in the 90's we viewed some of the stuff in the book as patronizing or demeaning to women.

I had only been a Christian for several years, and it taught a good lesson in discernment.  Don't swallow things whole.  Chew them up first.  Pick and choose between what is actually from Scripture and what is a cultural norm, especially if it's somebody else's cultural norm.  A formula for success is usually a recipe for disaster for people who don't fit.  It's a good thing to question the ideas of the celebrities, even if it makes you less popular.

Blog Spotlight Monday - Introduction

I'm introducing a new blog feature here at From the Pew.  It's called Blog Spotlight Monday.  Each Monday I'll be focusing on a different blog or other link in my blogroll or site on my favorites list.  Who hosts the blog; what it's about; key features of the blog; why I read it; all these things and more.  I'll link to the blog and give other necessary information.  Stay tuned and learn a bit more about my world on the other side of the clickthrough.

Monologue, Dialog, Preaching, Listening, Anyabwile, Carpenter, Sido and Christendom

For those of you not familiar with the dialog that's been going on, I'll keep that part brief.  For those of you who do know, you already know it.  What I have to say about it I think can benefit those not involved in the dialog, so please stay tuned beyond this paragraph.  So, a quick summary first.  Eric Carpenter at A Pilgrim's Progress critiqued a section of Thabiti Anyabwile's book on Expositional listening, which I briefly touched on here.  Anyabwile responded to somebody's critique of it at the Gospel Coalition, and many are assuming it was Carpenter's critique.  Anyabwile's post generated some big exchanges in the comments, and others I know like Arthur Sido jumped in, and then blogged on his own about another GC post on preaching as an ordinary means of grace.  Whew.

So, the ideas in question are 1) what is the role of preaching, 2) should it be done in church to believers or outside to the unbelievers, and 3) what should actually be done in the Sunday meeting.  Many of Anyabwile's critics point to their observation that there isn't a single example of a monologue sermon preached to believers in church anywhere in the NT, and all preaching is done outside of church to unbelievers.  Our Sunday church meetings should be dialog in nature, with all belivers participating in edifying one another.  Okay, I get their drift, and I also understand Anyabwile's viewpoint.  So what I have to say here is that I see people talking past one another in Anyabwile's comments section, and I think I know why.  It's partly a matter of historical and cultural contexts of both the apostles going out into the Gentile world in Acts, and the Protestant Reformation in medieval Roman Catholic Europe.  I'd like to beg everybody's pardon in advance, as I'm not a historian, and would invite correction and comment here.

The Apostles' Method

I actually see two methods the apostles used in Scripture to reach the Gentile world.  One, they went into the synagogues of the minority Jewish communities.  Their religion was already shaped by the Scriptures, they knew the Scriptures, and they were waiting for the messiah.  The message to them was, "Hey, you're God's people, but your man-made traditions have prevented you from seeing Yeshua as messiah.  Ditch your traditions and the evil deeds that come from them, and embrace Jesus."  Two, they went into the culture of the ignorant Greeks.  Their method was different.  "Your system of polytheism is death.  There's only one God, the one you missed.  He is Yahweh, and his Son is the Jewish messiah, Jesus the Lord.  Caesar isn't Lord, Jesus is.  Good news here folks, you're included in on the deal.  So repent of your sins and evil deeds you've done in ignorance, and believe in him and you'll receive eternal life."  Those "out there" that received the word were included in the church, made up of believers.

The Reformation

The context of the Reformation was different than the context of the Greek world and Roman Empire of the first century.  By the time of the Reformation, Christianity had already "conquered" Europe.  It had reached it's cultural conclusion in one sense.  The church was a dominant force in all of culture.  It affected all of life.  If you were born, you were baptized into the church.  This was the result of the apostles going out into the Roman Empire to begin with.  For the Reformers, reaching the lost wasn't a matter of going out into a strange world to preach Jesus to a lost people.  It more closely resembled my first apostolic method above, going to the Jews who had already had the foundations of religion laid down.  The lost masses were already in church.  The Reformers believed that a corrupt and wayward church had prevented the truth from making its way to the masses.  It had prevented the truth from being known even to the church leaders.  So, for the Reformers, the logical strategy would be preaching the word to those in church.  That the church was everywhere, and everybody was already connected to the church in some way.  The cultural context was one of Christendom. 

Now, seeing their context, it would be easy for the Reformers to see a positive effect preaching would have on uneducated church attenders.  They were hearing truths they never heard before.  They were being greatly affected by the application of God's word directly to them and in their own language for the first time.  And this great affect spread out over large parts of Europe.  It would be easy for the Reformers to conclude that preaching to people in church was a means of grace.  It would be easy for them to turn this into a doctrine. It would be easy to see that since this was a widespread phenomenon, that it should be something that everybody should do at all times.  It would be easy to teach this down through their own generations, and it would be easy for those who were taught it to hand it down.  It would be easy to see the same affect in other situations with a similar historical/cultural context.  It would be easy to see all this as a timeless, eternal truth rather than a contextual strategy.

But...it may be easy to see this method not working as well with a church of already more mature believers.  It would be easy to recall the tradition and its most early effects without realizing the context from which it came, and apply the doctrine to this group of more mature believers.  It might be easy to see the lack of the same kind of response as a deficiency on the part of the listeners as opposed to the deficiency of the strategy.  This could easily lead to a doctrine or teaching of expositional listening and expositional note taking.

Now, please understand, I'm not against preaching in the church, or against good listening.  My concern is that we in the Reformed world don't see our own contextual history and have a tendency to view things as applicable to all cultures at all times, simply because we're Reformed.

Friday Night Potpourri

A lovely week for just about anything:

• A strong wind this week took all those brown spikey ball things off the maple trees and littered the street.  The kids got the bright idea to collect as many as possible in the ice chest, then deposit them in our front planter.  It was fun to see them with sand pails and shovels collecting their toy treasures.
• Warm temps in the day and freezing ones at night make for a good extra deal of laundry.  Don't know what to wear.  Rain's coming next week, they say.  I was just getting used to watering the lawn again.
• Remember pigs in a blanket?  Well, that's what we had for lunch today.  Mustard and ketchup.
• Those ball point pens sure do come in various colors.
• Had a date night tonight and we were seated at the restaurant.  Somebody called to Mrs. Scott, and it was her best friend from high school sitting in the booth across from us.  A friend of mine from high school was doing the music in the bar, guitar and vocals.
• Last, but certainly not least, is nodding off at the keyboard while typing this post.
• Happy V-Day weekend with some love frum the pew.

Half-Cussin' Has Its Own Theology

Fresh off the fun with linking to Dan Allen's The Christian Cuss Word Flowchart a few days ago, I'm piggybacking here with another concept.  Dan's post pulled the trigger, but what loaded the gun was a comedy clip I heard not long ago on a radio station.  You know, those "five o'clock funnies" kind of deals.  The comedian was talking about how we use substitute words to half-cuss.  You know, like using "freaking" or "friggin'" when we really could use the other word.  He added a few religious half-cuss words to spice up the routine, like when people use "Jeez" for Jesus, "Gosh" for God, and the like.  "Jeez Louise" would mean a half-invocation of Mother Mary of course.

This got me to a thinkin'.  Our culture uses several more half-cussin' religious words, like "darn" and "heck."  Then it came together.  I found that if I strung some of those half-cuss words together, I could create a half-cussin' theology.  I was looking for the right context to air this, and Dan's post was it.  The half-cusser has his own theology.  And when these words are strung together, albeit humorous for me, it really does seem to capture the weak theology of mainstream American evangelicalism.  So without further delay, I present to you the freaking theology of the half-cussin' man:

Unless you believe in Jeez, the Son of Gosh, you'll be darned to heck.  - Hezekiah 3:16

John MacArthur on Public Criticism

Blogger Tim Challies conducted a ten question interview - on various topics - with evangelical pastor John MacArthur, and has split the interview into two parts on his blog, Challies.com.  In part 2 of this interview, Challies asks MacArthur the following question:

How can we best critique people who are “in our camp” and yet believe things different from us? Or behave in ways we do not appreciate? How can we know where to draw those lines?

In his response, which touches several aspects of criticism, MacArthur gives his own interpretation of people "in our camp," which he "understand[s] to mean those who affirm a biblical gospel but differ with us on secondary issues."  A final thought MacArthur gives on this subject is the following:

One final thought to add is this: I believe that it is appropriate to respond publicly to that which has been taught publicly. If someone has published something in a book or on a blog or preached it in a sermon (which has then been made available online), it is now subject to public critique. I certainly believe this is true with regard to my own teachings. Anything I have preached or published (and therefore made public) is consequently subject to public criticism. And I don’t consider my critics to necessarily be unloving just because they disagree with me. In fact, I welcome their feedback, because it is part of the sharpening process.

Very interesting.  Very interesting, indeed.  I think I'm going to hold on to this quote for those people who have been critical of the times other people have been critical of MacArthur and other public figures.  How do you criticize a critic for being critical?

Blog Spotlight?

I thought of an idea for a regular feature at From the Pew.  I might call it "Blog Spotlight."  There's a small play of words in there, seeing that one of the major blog hosts, Blogger, uses "blogspot" in its domain name.  Anywho, this feature would be a highliting of one blog per week that I read regularly.  I would include blogs I agree with, some I disagree with on some larger issues, some that don't have much to do with theology, blogs that stretch my thinking, or that have influenced my beliefs to a good degree, etc.  I have a wide variety of stuff I read from many different viewpoints, and I thought it might be good for the small number of readers I have to check those sites out.  Hopefully this will commence in a few weeks.  As always, stay tuned.