Category: General Christian Teachings

Thoughts Heading Home From Christmas

I mentioned last night in the blog that my family and I were watching Monk. Now my mother and my roommate and I were downstairs when the latest new one that was a Christmas episode also came on called “Mr. Monk and the Miracle.” My mother saw it and said “Oh! I remember this one this is the one where…” and she proceeded to tell a little bit about what happened.

I smiled and told her it was also one my roommate had never seen before.

We didn’t get to see the whole episode as we had to go pick up my grandmother, but I did end up on the way back home that day telling him what happened seeing as he had had his curiosity piqued. I thought about that later though and thought “I am thankful the greatest author of all leaves a lot of the plot open without telling us everything that’s going on.”

Sometimes, we all wish he would, but he’s a good author. I’m thankful he doesn’t.

On the way back, my roommate and I were both exhausted and I was doing the driving. Now we’d had a close call on the way there. We’d had to take an area of at the most I’d say 200 feet at a traffic light and cross two lanes suddenly to get to a turn-off. Downtown traffic in a major city is murder. It doesn’t help that I can’t really turn my head and I needed him to be my eyes for me.

On the way back, he fell asleep some of the way and I thought about that. I thought that he was calm enough and trusting enough with me that he could rest easily even though I, the best driver in the world, was not driving. Then I thought back on myself and wondered, “How often do I sometimes stay up at night or wake up at night because I’m worried about something in my life?”

It made me ponder that if only I could trust God as much as my roommate was trusting me then. Now I think I’m a pretty trustworthy guy, but I can assure you of this. I have far more reason to trust in God than my roommate could ever have to trust in my ability or in me in any way. I took that as an object lesson to work on recognizing that I need to trust God more and relax in him and believe that he is looking out for me.

One part of our journey was through the mountains and as we got to them, I thought about what a wonder it was. Somehow, sights like those dwarf us automatically. Yet I considered first off the biblical statement of how if you believe and pray a mountain be cast into the sea, it will be done for you.

Now I’m not going Word of Faith nonsense here. I don’t believe the mountain is literally supposed to do that, but I think the Lord was getting at how the greatest things that dwarf us so much are nothing compared to the power of God and if we trust in God, then he will take care of them. 

A mountain is an apropos example. It’s something great and majestic and you imagine what it would be like if you could get a mountain to be hurled into the sea. You would think that nothing would be impossible for you. Could it be Christ is trying to tell us that all things are possible with God so trust him in prayer?

The second thought was of how the medievals said that one man is worth more than the entire universe. I believe they were right, but you look at the mountains and you feel so dwarfed and then realize that God considers you worth much more than them.

I also watched as we left late in the afternoon to see the sky turn from blue to black as day became night. It’s an odd thing as you notice it happening, but at the same time, you don’t. You just look up and realize that it’s darker than before as the Earth is making its turn. Then you realize that it’s night.

I’ve been told that if you put a frog in boiling water, it’ll jump out immediately. However, if you put it in water and gradually boil it, you can cook the frog alive and until it’s too late, it won’t realize what is happening to it.

I thought if the church was like that also. I’m quite sure we are. We’ve had our moment in the sun so much that the world gradually grew darker and darker and we didn’t really pay attention and we’ve suddenly woken up and it’s night all around us. It’s a shame we haven’t paid attention. Is it too late for the church in America? My advice is to act like it isn’t.

Towards the end of the journey, I was counting on my roommate to provide the directions. He’s got an IPhone and if you don’t know, those have GPS capabilities. Well, I’m a control-freak in some ways I think. When I’m on the road, I like to know exactly what the next exit I’m supposed to go to is and how far away it is so I can start looking and calculating the distance and how long it’ll be. 

My roommate does not give such information, which I think is for the best for me and it taught me a lot about trust.

I had to trust him the whole way but as I thought about it, he had to trust me also. He was giving the directions, but I was the one behind the wheel and we had to rely on each other, which I think is a good definition of friendship as well. What benefit would it be for him to give me the wrong directions and how would it benefit me if I was to drive haphazardly? Of course, that doesn’t mean we each did it for our own benefit. Sharing a mutual goal, we both had to work together and that is also in friendship. I believe Aristotle said that one thing friends do is help each other on the path to becoming more virtuous.

As I got home that Christmas, I had a lot to think about. I had to think about God in ways that you can only realize I believe with the help of others. What does it mean to trust? What does it mean to be trusted? What does it mean to rely on your friends? What can be done to make a difference for the church?

I have much to think about, and I hope you have much to think about as well.

Thoughts on Christmas

I’m back home and I plan on writing on the thoughts that I had on the way home probably tomorrow. For now, I hope my loyal readers didn’t mind the absence of a blog yesterday, but I knew my family was wanting to see me and I wanted to go on and get home.

I’d like to write tonight on how Christmas has changed over the years for me and maybe some of you are in the same boat. I remember being younger and getting to bed at an early time on Christmas Eve night. (Well, as early as I could. We usually stayed up till about midnight opening presents at my aunt’s.) I wanted to get to bed so I could see all the cool stuff I got in the morning.

I don’t think patience is one of my strong points. I remember getting up in the morning and making sure that my parents got up and rushing them as quickly as I could so we could go downstairs and we could all have Christmas together. I can remember some of the gifts that I got for Christmas, but as I look back, it’s harder and harder. 

As I’ve got older, I look forward more to the reactions of other people when they see the gifts that I’ve got them. This year with my roommate, it added a new perspective as I’d see him open gifts that I’d told them that he’d like and seeing the joy that he had, as well as the joy at hearing that my mother had gone out and bought a chocolate cheesecake. 

There are so many gifts that I can’t wait to see other people open them. That joy is a far greater joy to me. Now that doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy receiving gifts, I do. It does mean though that being older and wiser, I see the wisdom of the quotation from Acts of Christ. “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” (Acts 20:35)

Now that I’m away, Christmas has become more about family. It’s not in opening gifts that I will eventually not see as exciting as I do at the time, but it’s about the moments of seeing my mother’s face and having chats with my Dad again. This morning, my family and I watched Monk together on a USA network marathon, something we used to always do together.

Let it not be lost on us though what makes this day so astounding, as it easily can be. This is the day to celebrate that the Word became flesh. Heaven came down and visited Earth. God wrote a story and then made an appearance in his own story. The author stepping into it caused the calendar to be restarted.

The world is vastly different today as a result of Jesus. It has been said that if Jesus had never been, we could have never invented a Jesus, and I concur entirely. We have grown up with the message of the gospel though that in a sad weay, we have lost the shock value of it. There are so many things that we would be stunned to hear as people living in the 1st century Roman Empire that we think of in a more “Ho hum” kind of way today.

As a child, I did look and wonder what each gift was for me under the tree. May it be that we regain and never lose the wonder of the gift God gave to us.

A Further Defense of Hell

A comment on my thoughts in the After-Death on Hell has spurred me to write more of a defense of this doctrine. I do plan, of course, on getting back to the topic of errors in anti-Trinitarian thought. I will be trying to blog on Christmas Eve, but I will be away from a computer on that night and if I don’t get around to it before heading back home, I don’t get around to it and my readers will have to wait til Christmas night so don’t panic if you don’t see something new on Christmas Eve. Of course, it will be a Christmas blog.

However, at the start I will say that I don’t get teary-eyed at Hell, but of course, I think the point of Moody is that this should not be a thing of joy. I’ve gone through several painful things without tears, but they are things of deep sorrow. I am not the type to express myself in that way, but I will say to my reader that I find it appalling that some will look with a knowing glint at the thought of anyone going to Hell. 

Hell has been presented as a grotesque doctrine. I will say most of our ideas from Hell come from Dante, but I don’t think Dante was making a literal description of Hell. He was writing an allegory. After all, he has mythological figures in his Hell. However, he did have degrees in there as well as the righteous pagans seemed to be living pretty good lives there. I’ll also say that I do believe in degrees of Hell that are determined by the way one lives their lives here.

Now I am told to defend God’s transformation of sinners into hideous sub-humans. I don’t believe God does such a thing. I believe God is simply giving the sinners what they’ve always wanted. Death hardens you in whatever path you’ve been walking. If you’ve been following Christ, your after-death will show that to the degree you were following him. If you weren’t, the corresponding will be true. What Hell is is actually God giving people what they want. To the degree that they want a life absent of him and in defiance of him, he gives them that.

Interesting though is being told to defend this. To defend assumes that it’s wrong for God to judge the world the way that he does and the question must be asked at this point, “Why?” I have several people who argue against the concept of Hell, and I can certainly understand it, but the question I would ask is “What do you propose God do instead?” For the sake of argument, let us grant that God is who the Bible describes him as and he has revealed himself in Christ and it’s entirely true. If that is granted, what ought God to do with those who persistently choose to deny what he has revealed?

Now I’m told that I do admit that we are separate from God in this world so why do I want it to be worse? That’s an odd question. I don’t teach the doctrine of Hell as true because I want it to be true. For instance, do I teach that people must wait to have sexual intercourse before they’re married because I really want that to be true? After years of thinking and reading on it, I do see a great beauty in that and see it as the best way, but there are many times I will definitely say, “No. I don’t want that to be true.” 

So when I speak about Hell, I am not speaking about what I want. I am speaking about what I can gather from the biblical text and my own speculation on it. I state what I state simply because I believe it to be true.

Now what of the response to God? Will some hate him? I fear they will for there are many who already do. I am not saying our questioner does, but I also think our questioner will not deny that there are some who hate him. Even if they are convinced in atheism, many people hate what they see God as representing. This would particularly be the case with morality. If my view that I am defending is true though of God being goodness, truth, beauty, love, etc., while being personal, then to reject God is ultimately to reject those in the long run. This is why I also believe that the more someone pursues those things in themselves, the more that they will get closer to the source of those things.

Why would God imagine Hell the way that it is? Well, if he is good and just and loving and perfect and all-knowing, then we can say that there was no better way to do it. 

Now our reader is right. I will ask what is his standard of good and evil. I note that none was given. However, the one given is not the one I would hold to either. It seems to assume that voluntarism is the only view of morality from a theistic perspective. For those who do not know, it would be saying rape is evil because God says it is. If he had said that rape was good, it would be good.

However, I believe that God is good since goodness is that which is desirable for its own sake. Thus, the word has content and then we find that content applies to God the most in that he is the most desirable good for its own sake. People are to desire God for the sake of God himself. In desiring him, they desire goodness itself for God is goodness. What comes from him then is also goodness. This would include being as God is being and being is good. Thus, the moral law is not something outside of God nor arbitrarily decided by God but that which reflects God himself and the way the three persons that are God act within the Trinity. In order to impugn Hell, we will need a moral standard outside of God and also a reason why that standard should be accepted if it is not rooted in something eternal and immutable.

Now my stance in the Smallville parallel has been brought up and I understand it. However, the first objection I raise is that I have made a slur against the majority of people who have ever lived. I would like to know how my readers knows the majority of people who have ever lived are lost. I find it quite unlikely considering texts from Rev. 7 for instance about a great multitude no one can number.

However, I said that this is what I think Hell is like and I am willing to admit of degrees of Hell for I do believe there is some goodness to Hell as there is ontological goodness of people and of even fallen angels for they are good insofar as they have being. Unfortunately, the more one goes against their being, the less good they become. It doesn’t mean one becomes  a rapist or an anarchist, but it does mean that one is going against what they were meant to be. Christians are told that we are being conformed to the image of the Son and that’s the only image that can get into Heaven. The question is not if someone will be conformed. Everyone will be. The question is, “Into what kind of image?”

Now someone might object that they are living a good life. They just choose to deny Christ. This is also where we are told our righteousness is as filthy rags. If Christianity is true, then to deny Christ is not a mild act, but the worst kind of evil that can be done. Do we see the figure in the gospels of Christ as a liar or not? Of course, if someone wants to deny the historicity of the gospels, which I’m sure they do in some sense to be non-Christian, then I will be prepared to go there. 

Again though, granted the Christian framework, if Jesus is who he said he was, and one denies that, then they are saying that Christ is a liar. He was not who he claimed to be. Note I am saying that based on the historicity of the gospels. If one wishes to accept Christianity as true for the sake of argument, then it would follow that to deny Christ is the worst sin one can do.

Ultimately, it becomes the sin of saying “I see a way has been provided, but I will not accept the sacrifice of the Son of God. I will go my own way.” God has established the way to him though. He has established one. To deny that one way is ultimately to call him a liar as well. When Christ says no one comes to the Father but through him, I believe him. Apart from the agency of Christ, no one will see God. 

It must be noted in all of this also that to say we believe it to be true does not mean we like it. It means we believe it to be true. We believe it to be just, but that does not mean we delight in the justice. I can even believe some things are good and not like them. I can believe it good that an ailing loved one has gone home to be with Christ, but from my perspective, still not see that as good. I think of my friend who passed away recently who has gone home to be with Christ. I’m sure his family realizes that it is good for him now, but that they are suffering as well. I think they should be. We all lost much when he passed away. The point is that something being right or wrong does not depend on whether we like the something or not.

Well, there’s my further defense of Hell, and I hope it helps.

Mere Humanity By Donald T. Williams

Last night, I finished a book I was reading and frankly, I wasn’t impressed. Aside from the quotes I got from some sources, I was thinking that I didn’t really learn anything new and I felt like I was reading something more of a fundamentalist persuasion than an intelligent critique of a view I disagree with.

What a refresher it was to start the next book on my list.

I saw this one at the apologetics conference. The subtitle is “G.K. Chesterton, C.S. Lewis, and J.R.R. Tolkien on the Human Condition.” Anyone heavily into apologetics must read the apologetics works of Chesterton and Lewis.

From the first page, I believe I was caught up in this book, which really disappoints me that I didn’t find the time to read today. Of course, I was having Christmas with some friends so I suppose that is justified on some level.

The thoughts I was reading last night were so intriguing and the more I came to know my nature as a human, the more I came to appreciate the glory of who God is. The title in no way is meant to idolize humanity, but one can’t help but think of Psalm 8 and say “What is man that you are mindful of him?” Indeed. What is man?

He starts off his journey with the question of “Is Man A Myth?” Narnia fans will hopefully recognize the title as it was on Tumnus’s shelf when Lucy came to visit him in “The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe.” Williams tells us that ironically, the question could be asked of our age also. 

What does it mean to be a human after all? Will reductionistic fallacies end up destroying us? Williams points out how we know more about the physical make-up of a baby in the womb than ever before, and yet, never have we been more uncertain about what all that information is supposed to inform us concerning.

The Chesterton chapter is particularly fascinating as he discusses how Chesterton in “The Everlasting Man” wanted to bring about the idea of man as an animal to its conclusion and see if the people of his day (And ours for that matter) could live with such a conclusion.

One line I found particularly interesting told of how Chesterton had a friend who had seen an airplane rising off and what a wonderful sight it was, but not nearly as wonderful as the sight of a man rising upon a horse. 

It was such a marvelous thought! Truly, there is something incredible about us learning the physical laws enough that we can use them to our advantage, but a horse is different! A horse is a free-will entity that we eventually figured out that we could domesticate. A horse doesn’t naturally have a way to be controlled by man, and yet, we have come up with one. However, most of us probably see men on horses and think nothing of it and see an airplane and consider that the real marvel. We should salute the Wright brothers for the good they brought the world, but I wish we knew that first guy who decided to ride a horse.

For Chesterton, there were two things that were unique as the book tells us. There is the creature called man and there is the man called Christ. In another saying prior to the Chesterton chapter we are asked, “Is man a myth?” We are told perhaps not, but there was a time when a myth became a man. 

As of now, I am on Lewis’s chapter on the Abolition of Man and I still believe this is going to be one of the best books I’ve read. Will a full review of it come up on my blog later on? Probably. For now, I can’t recommend enough that readers of my blog get your hands on this book.

Some Thoughts On The After-Death

A friend of mine was talking to me last night and asking me for my thoughts on the nature of the After-Death. (Note that I’m sure he said After-life, but I prefer to call it the After-Death. There is a continuing process with my life in between my being here now and my being in a state of separation of soul and body to finally the unification of the two barring Christ does not come back prior to my death.

What a fascinating question! The question specifically was on Hell and I thought about that and thought “It would not be proper to do Hell without doing basic ground work.” My first goal then is to give some precursory thoughts I have on thinking about the afterlife and ruminating over what I know from Scripture.

One idea I had immediately was thinking of how many times when Heaven is described, we have the word “like” showing up. One word translated as like is Homoios. It shows up from time to time in books leading up to Revelation. The number of times it shows up in Revelation is not huge, but it is definitely greater.

It seems as if when John is describing his revelation, he cannot think of the words to say. No picture seems adequate. All he can say is “Well, it was like this.” He can’t fully give a description and I figure it is because our language is just inadequate to express it. The greatness of the ideas cannot fit themselves into the words that we use.

This certainly isn’t different from what we see in Paul. In 2 Cor. 12, he describes his own experience where he was taken to Heaven temporarily and saw things that cannot be expressed. In a way, this bolsters my belief in Scripture.

Why is that? In other beliefs, you do find ideas being told of what it is like, such as 72 virgins being there. If the Christians were making this up, you think they’d give some concrete realities and tie that to the Earthly experience. The Muslim Paradise is simply taking what is seen as a great good here and extrapolating it to great prpoportions into the after-death.

Not so with Scripture. Scripture leaves the wonder of what is there and indicates that it is too awesome to be conveyed. The writers could have easily given a description were they making it up. I believe though that they saw something and that something was something they knew they couldn’t really convey.

This is the same kind of thing that happens with some Near-Death experiences, and there is some conjecture that Paul’s event could have been a near-death experience that he had after being stoned at Lystra. (I think we can all safely agree that if you weren’t dead after such an event, you would certainly be near dead.)

It’s my understanding that when people who have had these experiences are interviewed, they often will tell that the language they use just doesn’t describe it. If they say anything, we’ll start comparing it to something Earthly and that just won’t get the idea. Now I do believe there is some connection as we are told of a New Heavens and a New Earth so there is some Earth there, but I think the emphasis would definitely be on the “New” aspect of it.

My contention is based on Romans 8 and it is that God is going to redeem creation, but it is not going to be beyond the creation from the beginning. I believe God created this world knowing it would be the battleground between good and evil. It was not made to be eternal as it is. Like the kids in Narnia, it won’t be that the next world will remind us of some of the things in this world, but rather when we get there, we will realize we loved some of the things in the world as it is now, because they pointed us to that world.

If you are looking for the furniture of Heaven, as it were, I do not believe I can give it, nor can I give such for Hell. We are given ideas about these, but not descriptions, for I believe the real ideas of these places is not focused on physical realities, but on relational realities.

We shall continue looking at that tomorrow.

The Real Battle

Last night, I blogged on how I was fighting Yiazmat, the boss in Final Fantasy XII with 50,000,000 hit points. I could have beat him last night, but I had some friends who I normally go bowling with on Sunday nights, so I paused with maybe around 1.5 mllion hit points left on him and went bowling. My thinking is that I can resume a game any time. My time with my friends is different.

So I go and before too long, one of them is telling me about how a former co-worker of mine and a current one of hers was giving her a two-hour lecture on God and Jesus. Note that this was being said knowing that I am a Seminary student and that I definitely have some strong beliefs on the topic.

What resulted? Instead of a two-hour lecture, in between our bowls, an hour and a half-discussion with two of my other friends listening in and saying things every now and then and ending with my friend saying “I want to know why you believe what you believe.” Why’d I have to go? Well, I have a job that requires me to get up early, so home I went. 

But I thought about that as I left the bowling alley. Now I did meet my goal today of vanquishing Yiazmat, but I also thought “Heaven won’t care if I defeated Yiazmat ultimately.” What will matter the most though will be that I was a witness for the Christ in the time that I had here. That is the real battle of good and evil.

Now as I say that, some of you might be thinking “Then why waste your time on things that don’t matter?” Because I think those things that we sometimes think don’t matter are secondary so that we can do the primary things. A man needs to take time for pleasure in his life that is non-religious in its nature for God gave us many good things to enjoy and those secondary things enable us to enjoy the good things and do the primary things better. If I did not take time to unwind in the evening, I wonder if I could truly do the apologetics that I do during the day.

Consider marriage as an example. There are a number of guys, and I think I’m one of them (In fact, I’m quite certain that I am) that come alive with the love of a good woman in the romantic sense. A woman can definitely help empower a man to do things that he would not normally be able to do.

That is really non-religious in its nature as marriage is something you can do regardless of religion. However, a good marriage can enable some men and women to be better at practicing their religion. In the same way, I believe our hobbies and interests when given the proper time enable us to be the best at what is primary. Note this. The secondary must always serve the primary.

However, this is where the real battle is fought. I enjoy fantasy battles of course, I’m a huge gamer. This is the most important battle of all. Peter Kreeft has said Christian apologetics is the closest you get to saving the world. I think he’s absolutely right. We’re each doing our part in the ministry. Some of us are empowerers. We enable others to go out and fight. Some of us are fighting in the frontlines. 

We’re all needed. There are many battles out there to win and one way to lose is that the soldiers don’t do their jobs. Get out there and be the best at doing what you do. Someday, that will be a battle that Heaven will talk about.

Big Ugly

I spend my Sunday afternoons away from debate in relaxation. If someone contacts me on those days, it’d better be important. I often listen to MP3s and get in some gaming at the same time and today, I started a long goal of mine and began fighting Yiazmat in Final Fantasy XII.

Yes. I said began.

Why do I say began? Because this is the ultimate bonus boss in the game that has 50,000,000 hit points. (Yes. I counted the number of zeros. It is 50 million hit points.) This is not a boss that usually falls in one setting and I put the game on pause to go get some ice cream as usual on Sunday. I might not finish it tonight and might finish it tomorrow night. Now someone can walk away and save and his hit points will remain the same, but I’ve heard he does some healing stuff and I don’t want to risk it.

And some of you are thinking, “Geez. You’ve told us a lot about your gaming experience. Is this a change of the nature of the blog from being about theology and apologetics to being about your adventures in video games?”

If you think that, shame on you.

My roommate is also a Final Fantasy buff and I’ve told him the law that I have noticed for most games which includes Final Fantasy. The deadliness of a boss monster is in direct proportion to the bigness of that monster and the ugliness of that monster. If you come across a creature in a game that is big and ugly, brace yourself. You’re in for a tough battle.

Yiazmat is not the biggest and toughest boss to ever appear in a Final Fantasy game though. The biggest one of all was in Final Fantasy X. (At the time of this blog, this is true as far as I know.) In that case, the party even has to go inside this creature and defeat it from within and there is a whole labyrinth and a practical city inside of this monster.

Interestingly, I didn’t have a Playstation 2 when this game came out and it was one of the reasons I got it. I still read gaming magazines and had to stop when I saw a story about Final Fantasy X so I could see what it would be about.

I had to read what I read twice to make sure I read it right.

The game involves a character named Tidus who is a champion of a sport called Blitzball in his town. However, his town is demolished when a mindless and destroying force bent on destruction comes through leaving everything in ruins. This force is called Sin.

Yes. I’m not kidding. It’s Sin.

Now if anyone wants to see how big and ugly this thing is, either go to YouTube or go to Google Images and type in something like Final Fantasy X Sin. Throughout the game, various bosses are fought that are seen as SinSpawn. These are little pieces of Sin, which still dwarf the main characters. All of them are, of course, ugly.

It makes me wonder.

When we consider Christ, Christ is goodness incarnate and he is a beautiful figure. I’m not saying that Christ was a Fabio walking around Judea, but he is seen to us today as a figure of beauty simply because of his character and many of us today would see him as a beautiful figure.

What would sin look like if it took form?

Characters who see Sin in Final Fantasy X are ready to take up arms and destroy it. The whole game is about the attempt to get rid of Sin, which when it happens from time to time, leaves a period that is known as the Calm, but Sin always returns. Now I disagree with how Sin is dealt with in the game, but it’s interesting how many times the word “atonement” shows up and how there are helpers in the game and each is called a “fayth.” (For you spelling nazis, that’s how it’s spelled in the game.)

We sometimes see sin in our lives as cute and innocent. Have you ever wondered what would happen if it was personified? Do you think it would be something cute? Would it not be hideous and evil? Would it not meet the criteria of a Final Fantasy boss in being big and ugly, which means it does some serious damage?

What would you do if you could see your Sin?

Would you take up a sword and fight?

Or would you instead shake hands and treat it like an old friend.

I leave that question to you and I think you know the implications to be drawn depending on how you answer.

Do We Want God Like That?

I  was in a dialogue with an atheist recently about a passage in the Psalms he didn’t like and he was saying “Your God is good isn’t he?” Well, yes. He is. However, I had to add that he is also a just God and he is a God who punishes sins.

But as I thought about it that night, I realized that that was the question I was asked. “Is he good?” Isn’t it interesting that that seems to be one of the main questions asked. The others would be “How can a God of love allow this to happen?”

It seems we focus then on the attributes that we like. We focus on the goodness of God because we want God to be good partially. Of course, we believe he is anyway in classical theology, but goodness is one that appeals to us more on how God relates to us.

We want God to be loving because we like the fact that God loves us. Now I don’t believe he is loving but that he is love and his being loving is a result of that. Again, I am not against saying that God is love and believing that he loves us. 

We even want a God of justice at times because there are a lot of evil people in the world and we want to see them get what we deserve. Interesting aspect of that is that when it comes to punish sin, we always seem to want God to punish everyone else’s sins and never our own.

What about holiness?

I think this could be one reason we don’t emphasize holiness. We don’t see the relevance to our lives which is a great shame. However, it could be the opposite. It could be that we do see the relevance and we don’t want that relevance.

We can look at the other attributes and focus on how God is going to be towards us. When we think about his goodness, it means that he will be good to us. When we think about his loving, it means he will love us. When we think about his being just, it means he will punish those who abuse us.

When we think about him being holy, it means we must change the way we are to him.

It means we can’t approach God in a buddy-buddy way that is too often now. God is treated even less than the person that you’d treat on the street hopefully. A man talks to God while he’s shaving. One has to wonder if he’d do that if he was speaking before his boss sometime. Would you take your razor to your boss’s office when you have to meet him and shave while you talk to him?

What about changing your life? Most of us would not like the world to know some of the sins we remember doing. I know I wouldn’t. We have to realize God does know them and we have to own up to them. Holiness forces us, if we acknowledge it, to admit that we were wrong.

Are you willing to give up some things? Are you willing to start practicing some things? It might mean you have to ditch that internet pornography you’ve been dealing in. It might mean you have to part with some of your money in order to support the cause of Christ. Are you willing?

We don’t like change. Really. Most of us would like things to stay the same.

Holiness says you either become like Christ or you don’t see him at all.

And oh, we all say we want that, and in some level, most of us do, but we don’t want it in that way. We want to be like Christ in the way that we think he is and not the way that he really is. Surely this is a little sin! Surely God won’t make a big deal about that!

Now I think there are degrees of sin, but let’s remember that all sin is sin and it just takes one.

Holiness. It’s a doctrine that we might not emphasize because we don’t like what it requires. It requires nothing of God, as if any other doctrine did, but it requires everything of us. Do we really care about holiness today?

Church Music

I recently read C.S. Lewis’s “Christian Reflections” where he has a short chapter with his thoughts on church music. I decided to write on the topic as well, seeing as I agreed with much of what Lewis said. I realize that after I write this, some of my readers might think I’m somewhat of a Philistine. Oh well. 

Lewis says that he is like many laymen. He wants the hymns to be fewer, better, and shorter, and particularly fewer. Many of you might be surprised to hear that. I don’t think it’s because Lewis was an intellectual. I consider my roommate an intellectual as well, and he’s quite the music lover and in the praise band at our church.

Honestly, church music is rather an awkward time for me during the service. I’m standing there listening and I consider the magic words to be “You may all be seated.” I would often much rather sit and listen and meditate, which is often what I do during prayer. I will normally sit, because I see it as a position of humility and it reminds me that he is God and I am not.

Now I’m not against all music of a Christian nature. For instance, if someone plays “Holy, Holy, Holy” I am deeply moved. It is not though because of the cadence of the music as it were. It is because of the great propositional truth that I find contained in that song. I particularly love to hear, “God in three persons. Blessed Trinity.”

I have another friend from where I used to live until he moved away who is a huge music fan and the worship leader at his church. (Do pray for him also. He’s in hard times now.) We’d listen to music in my car and if I thought a song was good he’d say “But it’s all on the same chord.” If he thought one was good I’d say “But the lyrics are hideous.” Now there were some songs we liked together like “This Fragile Breath” and a number of Casting Crowns songs, but there weren’t many.

Ironically, if you want to talk about music that does present an emotional response, I think of something like Smallville’s “Save Me” or as strange as it may sound, give me music from a classic video game and I’m set. I enjoy Evanescence and yes, I’m one of those crazy people that listens to Weird Al. To end the list, the tunes of House and Monk are also popular to me.

For me, church music doesn’t really do it. I think much of what I like is either associated with something else or it’s instrumental. When I hear church music, I’m too busy analyzing the lyrics in order to really get into the music of it all.

A little note if you are a musician and playing before the untrained like myself. If you make a mistake, unless it is a huge and obvious blunder, don’t sweat it. Most of us don’t recognize it. 

Now what does excite me is a good message. You give me something new on the nature of God and I’m set. That’s the way it is. You may not be like that. That’s fine. That’s something we have to realize. I’d prefer shorter songs. You might prefer shorter sermons. 

So some of you all might be wondering then what my stance would be on music in church. I like what Lewis said. He said that while he doesn’t get particularly edified, he realizes that there are others that are and the best thing to do is let them enjoy it. If it enhances their worship, great. If I can stand for a time and ponder lyrics and try to get theological truth, then that’s fine as well.

Now it could be that this is something wrong in my temperament and I’ll get past it later. I don’t know. I just know more often than not, I’d prefer to sit down with a good book instead of listening to some music. It’s the way that I relax. 

That’s my thoughts on the matter. Why speak? Because I wonder if maybe some people are like me also and we need to realize that the body of Christ is diverse in this and there are different ways of worship. I certainly have no desire to see music expunged from the church at all as it has always been a part of the church and neither would Lewis. I would like to see though more depth to the songs that we do have. If all were like “Holy, Holy, Holy,” I think my response might be quite different.

It’s Her Decision To Make

A friend of mine told me recently about a situation involving his sister. As readers know, I don’t like to name names on my blog and this time, I am definitely not doing such. In case any are concerned as well, I also told him my plans before I wrote this blog and he told me he would love to see me write on this topic. The identity of my friend will remain a secret, but he talked about how his sister could be in a compromising situation, which is not easily avoidable apparently, with a member of the opposite sex soon and how his mother had said “It’s her decision to make.”

Now I thought about this for awhile and it’s an odd claim to use. Of course it’s her decision to make. Who else could make it? Now naturally, if a thief draws a gun on you and says “Your money or your life,” it is still your decision. You could give your wallet and hope he’s merciful. You could try to karate kick him and hope you can succeed. You could just try to run and hope you can outrun him, but either way, the decision is yours still. The thief can coerce you, but he cannot decide for you.

Which is an interesting point, giving someone advice is not the same as making a decision for them. I seriously doubt any of us will ever get to the point if our parents are still alive and we’re in a good relationship with them when they don’t offer advice. My mother calls me to this day and still offers advice. Sometimes, I appreciate it and sometimes I don’t. There are times I still go to my friends and sometimes still to my family and ask for advice. 

So the first point that must be said is that when one offers advice, one does not take away the decision. In fact, there could be an attempt to force this event to not happen. If the daughter does not want it to, and I don’t believe she does, then she will be glad to work with it. If she does want it to happen, she will do what she can to avert it and it will be her mistake in that case. Either way, the final responsibility will be hers. If someone wants to do something sinful, they will find a way to do it. If they want to find a way out, they can do that as well.

But I notice something held in this statement also. It’s usually said when it involves a decision that we think someone could make a big mistake in, but we don’t seem to want to limit them for some reason. We think we’ll be intruding if we interfere at that level. Well, yes. You are intruding. You’re supposed to do such also. If you see someone who is about to walk into sin, you are supposed to do what you can to help that person out. In the end, the decision is theirs, but you are to do your part.

The person it seems would want the other one to make a good decision. If that’s the case, why not go on and offer your advice and a way out? We are told in Scripture that God provides a way out when we are tempted with sin. If God is willing to do it to avoid sin, is it too much for us to play our part?

I also told this friend that I have a rule that when dating, I would not allow a girl to be in my apartment when I’m alone. I wouldn’t even allow one if my roommate was here. Who knows? He might step out for awhile and I could take advantage of the time and for all who might think otherwise, my mind can immediately envisage such an event happening. Yes. My mind does think about such things. I am a guy after all. 

Now I told my friend also that someone might say to me “Are you really the type that if you had that time alone with a girl in your apartment you’d have sex with her?” I told him I’d answer, “I would hope not, but I don’t intend to put the situation to the test in order to find out.”

Why? I think we need to be real about our temptations. When I see a beautiful girl, I am tempted. When I sit down at my computer, I can think about all that I can access with just a few clicks of the mouse and for a moment, I am tempted. Fortunately, I haven’t acted on such temptations, but I have to be real about the temptations. 

Which makes me think this kind of objection is not being real about the temptation. The sexual drive is one of the most powerful drives out there. Why put it in a compromising situation? Now I realize we will all be in situations where we will be compromised, but how many of those do we want to enter into willingly? If we can avoid them and still bring about good, then why not do so?

So yes, it’s her decision to make. No doubt. It’s your decision though if you will help her or not.