On Blogging

It is interesting to see the differences between the websites/blogs my wife follows and ones I follow.  Hers are autobiographical and personal in nature. She loves to read about families and their lives, including their successes and struggles.  For example, she follows a blog called life{in}grace, written by a woman named Edie.  In a recent post, Edie shared how, just a few days after her pastor finished a sermon series on Job, her house burned down. Here is Edie in her own words…

…at 4:30 in the morning, I awake to a terrifying amount of smoke. My husband miraculously crawls through the house to try to get to the kids. I am unable to follow him and jump out the nearest  window and meet him at the front door. We stand screaming and sobbing and helpless,unable to get up the stairs to our kids. Caiti, my guardian angel daughter, who only by a miracle was even sleeping upstairs, was already awake and ushering the little girls out of harms’ way. She even has the forethought to have them cover their faces with their pillow. The image of my oldest daughter ushering her sisters through mortal danger to safety will forever be imprinted on my heart.

She’s the angel on the bridge.
My forever hero.

She then runs around to the basement to wake Cody. He rescues our dogs. Less than  two minutes later, our house is engulfed in flames and  before daylight is burned to the ground.    Everything.   Gone.   I don’t think I stop crying all day.   And shaking on the inside. I can’t stop thinking ‘what if’. And then I can’t stop saying prayers of thanksgiving. Only God can save 6 people and 2 dogs without so much as a singed strand of hair. I cannot plumb the depths of his love and mercy.

I, on the other hand, follow websites and blogs that focus more on theological ideas.  I’m interested in what pastors, professors, and theologians are saying in the realm of the Bible and doctrine.  For example, I follow my colleague Fred Sander’s blog. In a recent post, he speaks about how Christmas is more about the person of Jesus and Easter more about the work of Christ.  Here is Fred in his own words.

Of course it’s possible to focus on who Jesus is, even while telling the story of his death and resurrection. But at Christmas, it is unavoidable: the baby is not doing anything, and we can only stand amazed at who he is. Easter may be the festival of what Jesus did, but Christmas is the festival of who Jesus is. That is why so many of the Christmas carols come back to the note of simple adoration: “Come, let us adore him.” It is also why so many of them pose questions to us like “What child is this?” Adoration for who Jesus is, rather than thanksgiving for what he does, is the secret of the strange hush that steals over us at the center of this holiday. It is why all we can do is celebrate, gather with loved ones, and exchange gifts and gratefulness.

Perhaps comparing our online reading says something about basic differences between men and woman.  Or perhaps it just illustrates a basic difference between my wife and I (and not necessarily between men and woman).  In either case, it is interesting how my wife and I compliment each other.  She pulls me out of my world of ideas and helps me be more relational and perhaps I help her with the world of ideas (?).

Perhaps there is less of a difference between us though.  The Bible and the doctrine that flows from it are personal.  The Bible tells the story of a personal God breaking into our world in order to re-establish a relationship with us, one that is characterized by a new family relationship. And the stories of people that my wife exposes me to teach me about the every day playing out of this relationship between God and His children.  I’m thankful she exposes me to people like Edie so I can witness faith in action.  By the way… Edie, you and your family are in my prayers.  Thank you for sharing your story and how God is working in and through this tragic situation.

Mere Christianity?

I remember as a teenager first reading C. S. Lewis’ book Mere Christianity.  I particularly liked the title and the concept of mere Christianity (i.e., those core beliefs that all Christians can and should agree on).  As a teenager, I was ignorant of the fact that many Christians fought not only over the peripheral issues in Christianity, but more surprisingly, even what seemed to be central issues (e.g., the person and work of Christ).  As I hit my twenties and headed for my thirties, I became disillusioned with the pursuit of the concept of mere Christianity or what some may call essential Christian doctrine.

But then, my in thirties, I took a class with my friend Kevin and he helped at least see a possibility for how to wrestle with what was primary, secondary, and tertiary.  Since first seeing this, I have worked on it over the years, trying to refine and clarify.  I’ve found it useful to frame discussions in classes I teach in church as it puts issues in perspective for people (or at least for me).  Here is what I have come up with so far with significant help from Kevin.  I hope it is helpful for others out there.

1. Primary (or essential) doctrines

1.1. Definition – a doctrine in which, if someone disagrees, they cannot be considered a Christian.

1.2. Examples:

1.2.1. The Trinity

1.2.2. The Person and Work of Christ

2. Secondary doctrines

2.1. Definition – a doctrine on which Christians can disagree and still be Christian, but in order to maintain harmony in the local church, they cannot disagree or major problems will result. Primary cause of denominationalism and church splits.

2.2. Examples:

2.2.1. Church government – you cannot try to practice Episcopalian government in a congregational church.

2.2.2. Charismatic gifts – you cannot practice sign gifts (e.g., tongues) at a cessationist church.

2.2.3. Sacraments – if you believe that the sacraments are unnecessary (Salvation Army), you cannot practice in a church that does uphold the practice of the sacraments.

2.2.4. Worship music – you cannot do hymns in church’s that only want to do modern, praise music.

2.2.5. Egalitarianism – you cannot put a woman pastor in a non-egalitarian (i.e., complementarian) church.

2.2.6. Calvinism vs. Arminianism debate – difficult for Arminians to feel at home in a Calvinist church and vice versa.

3. Tertiary doctrine

3.1. Definition – a doctrine which people can disagree on in the local body, but still live harmoniously within the local body in spite of the difference.

3.2. Examples – note: these can be elevated to primary & secondary issues by some

3.2.1. Style of worship

3.2.2. Amount of tithe

3.2.3. Clothes you wear to church

3.2.4. Role of angels in the Christian life

3.2.5. End time/millennial view

__________________

C. S. Lewis made an attempt to define mere Christianity in his book of the same title, Mere Christianity.  You can purchase this book HERE through the Deus Tecum bookstore.  Just click on the button below to visit the store.

Blog Spotlight: Pulpit Magazine

One of the many blog’s I try to follow is Pulpit Magazine, a publication from the ministry of John MacArthur and Grace Community Church.  The reason I like this resource is because of its many excellent articles on theology and life.

For example, on the topic of prayer the magazine recently ran a four-part series on If God is Sovereign, Why Pray? (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4) In my conversations with people, this is one of the most common questions that come up (and it is a good, practical question too).

Another recent example comes from Tom Patton, an associate pastor at Grace Community Church, and his article The Emptiness of the American Dream…

Sadly, the unbeliever attempts the whole of his life to quench the unquenchable with something other than God. So he pursues fame, money, power, wealth, fitness, work, wisdom, education, love, or any other created thing that can perhaps quiet the desperate cry of his empty soul. But none of the things he finds—whether politics or popularity or creativity or anything else this world offers—can ever answer the call of his heart. He can pursue happiness, but he will never find it. As soon as he acquires one desire it turns into dust; as does the next, and the next after that, until life finally ends in disappointment.

This is the cotton candy fate of the American Dream that befalls all who embrace the cult of celebrity. From a distance it looks so appealing—a big and beautiful ball of glistening spun sugar. But those who finally get it, and taste it, find that it isn’t very filling. Sure, it is sweet for a moment. But it doesn’t bring lasting happiness. After a quick melt in the mouth it is gone forever . . . then what?…

What a great quote to share with a non-Christian or a Christian enamored by the world.

If you are looking for a blog that gives good theological content and attempts to intersect it with your daily life, this is a good one to explore and keep up with.

Book Recommendation: A Case for Historic Premillennialism

One of the most popular eschatological (end times) systems is dispensational premillennialism, which involves a pretribulational rapture of believers followed by seven years of tribulation, Christ’s return, a 1000 year reign of Christ on earth, and then the final battle.  This is the system behind books and movies such as the Left Behind series.  This system has become so dominant in Christian circles that, at times, a person’s Christian faith can be called into question by not holding to it. One alternative to this system is what is called Historic or Classic Premillennialism, also known as Post-tribulational Premillennialism.

In 2007, a group of Christian scholars gathered at Denver seminary to discuss this topic and the book pictured above is the result of their discussion.  Their subtitle is An Alternative to “Left Behind” Eschatology. I hope people will read this book to at least see there are orthodox, evangelical alternatives to what we have typically been taught through the Christian media and in some of our churches.

My Dilemma: Loving & Hating Eschatology

In currently teaching a series on the book of Revelation, I have had to confront my distaste for eschatology (the study of the last days); more specifically, not eschatology itself, but rather particular methods in the study of eschatology.  Let me illustrate my dilemma of loving and hating eschatology by talking about the book of Revelation.

In the book, there are major literary events that occur: a throne and lamb in heaven, judgments upon the earth, God’s new city where His people will dwell forever, etc.  One of the methods for understanding these events is to match them up to historical events.  In other words, the literary events in Revelation primarily match the events in the first 400 years of the church (i.e., preterism), or the literary events match events future to John’s readers and us (i.e., futurism), or the events are spread throughout church history (i.e., historicism).  These are all examples of a puzzle solving method when it comes to this book and this is where my hate of eschatology (again, not eschatology itself, but these methods) wells up.

What is a better path?  I believe it is the picturing making method.  In other words, let the literary events in Revelation (or Daniel or Ezekiel) be literary events and look at the big pictures the book gives us.  Revelation makes sense this way.  So, instead of trying to figure out who the anti-Christ will be or trying to determine if the church is present in chapters 4-19 or building a time line, focus on the big themes: a throne, a lamb, a storm of judgment, and a new city.

The original readers in Asia Minor (today Turkey) experienced pressures from all angles including the pressures of economics, the Roman imperial cult, earthquakes, etc.  How did they respond to the big picture visions of a throne, lamb, storm, and a city?  Probably by feeling encouragement to persevere, even perhaps to death, because their God sits on the throne and nothing happens to them except by divine decree or permission.  This kind of God with this kind of power is a God to trust.  This is a God to hope in.  He is their future.  And this is why I love eschatology.