Yes, today's topic is prayer, but first an awful pun that indicates my relationship to my classes. (They're going well, by the way, but I have to keep motivated.) The words "diligence" and "dilly-dally" popped into my head simultaneously. Thus, my struggle is determining whether I will practice diligence or dilly-dallygence. Since I'm typing on my blog right now instead of listening to a lecture, you know what's winning.
For the SysTheo class, I'm reading a book by the professor, Ray S. Anderson, called "Judas and Jesus." There's a great quote about prayer on page 51 that I've been chewing on for a couple of days: "Prayer is not a means of removing the unknown and unpredictable elements in life, but rather a way of including the unknown and unpredictable factors in the outworking of the grace of God in our lives."
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Monday, June 23, 2008
The ground of evil
My head is swimming with a few thoughts from my SysTheo lectures. (I never dreamed I would say that, disliking my previous Systematics experience so much.)
One incidental idea dealing with the topic is the fact that when Adam and Eve sinned, they didn't become sinners; they died. While "sinner" is a theological category with some merit, given that the word is used in the Scriptures, I'm wondering if it has become a useless word. The fundamentalist leanings of our society created a backlash against the word, and now it is in such disfavor among the culture we are trying to reach that I think we should drop it. I would characterize its use as nitpecking. Nitpicking would be a bit more genteel and productive, even though it's annoying. The church has tended to behave like a woodpecker on the heads of so many unsuspecting "sinners." If we addressed sin and evil at its root, it would be immensely more helpful (and threatening, too, because then our own sinful hearts would be revealed). Maybe in a generation or two "sinner" can become a useful word again.
The major thought from the class that struck me is that the reason Israel has had such a rough go of it throughout history is because she is in intimate relationship with the holy Creator God. (There's a side point where they suffer vicariously for the rest of humanity, which is fascinating, but not the point here.) If Israel had been left to herself, she would have gone on like the other nations, moderately evil, but appearing mostly good. However, God came near, and as he placed covenant demands on her, they kept trying to throw off the yoke. "Leave us alone! Weren't we better off back in Egypt anyway?" The amazing part of all this is, God still relentlessly pursued Israel. She kept trying to get away, but God rode the spiral all the way down with her. Only at her death did resurrection become an option.
The reason this rocked my world is I see this pattern in my own life. I always wondered why despite being married to my wonderful wife, my eyes still wander/wonder after other women. I think this is exactly the reason. Before I was covenanted with God and Susan, I was moderately evil, but appearing mostly good. There was no real reason to be concerned about appreciating an attractive woman (physical or otherwise). Wasn't that, after all, the way I knew who I wanted to ask on a date? But now in the holiness of our marriage, my heart is being revealed as deceitful and beyond cure. (Is this a surprise? I think Jeremiah called it. I've just never been willing to admit it.) This is the beauty of marriage, fallen though we are, that God uses it to sanctify us. Paul had that odd note in 1 Corinthians that the unbelieving spouse is sanctified through the believing spouse. For those who let it happen, marriage will reveal their wickedness and drive them to the Creator for reconciliation.
One incidental idea dealing with the topic is the fact that when Adam and Eve sinned, they didn't become sinners; they died. While "sinner" is a theological category with some merit, given that the word is used in the Scriptures, I'm wondering if it has become a useless word. The fundamentalist leanings of our society created a backlash against the word, and now it is in such disfavor among the culture we are trying to reach that I think we should drop it. I would characterize its use as nitpecking. Nitpicking would be a bit more genteel and productive, even though it's annoying. The church has tended to behave like a woodpecker on the heads of so many unsuspecting "sinners." If we addressed sin and evil at its root, it would be immensely more helpful (and threatening, too, because then our own sinful hearts would be revealed). Maybe in a generation or two "sinner" can become a useful word again.
The major thought from the class that struck me is that the reason Israel has had such a rough go of it throughout history is because she is in intimate relationship with the holy Creator God. (There's a side point where they suffer vicariously for the rest of humanity, which is fascinating, but not the point here.) If Israel had been left to herself, she would have gone on like the other nations, moderately evil, but appearing mostly good. However, God came near, and as he placed covenant demands on her, they kept trying to throw off the yoke. "Leave us alone! Weren't we better off back in Egypt anyway?" The amazing part of all this is, God still relentlessly pursued Israel. She kept trying to get away, but God rode the spiral all the way down with her. Only at her death did resurrection become an option.
The reason this rocked my world is I see this pattern in my own life. I always wondered why despite being married to my wonderful wife, my eyes still wander/wonder after other women. I think this is exactly the reason. Before I was covenanted with God and Susan, I was moderately evil, but appearing mostly good. There was no real reason to be concerned about appreciating an attractive woman (physical or otherwise). Wasn't that, after all, the way I knew who I wanted to ask on a date? But now in the holiness of our marriage, my heart is being revealed as deceitful and beyond cure. (Is this a surprise? I think Jeremiah called it. I've just never been willing to admit it.) This is the beauty of marriage, fallen though we are, that God uses it to sanctify us. Paul had that odd note in 1 Corinthians that the unbelieving spouse is sanctified through the believing spouse. For those who let it happen, marriage will reveal their wickedness and drive them to the Creator for reconciliation.
Friday, June 20, 2008
The gospel of anything but the gospel
Yesterday at lunch we talked about political parties. My position is that a two-party system is lousy, because it creates potential polarity. We've done okay for a couple of hundred years, but now the polarity has become actual. "If we disagree, and I'm right, then that must make you . . . " If I label myself a Republican, then naturally all Democrats are wrong. (This is why I'm registered as an independent. We're all wrong someplace, but if we have to stick to a party platform, then suddenly my party is right and everyone else is wrong.)
In the biggest scheme, that may not be very consequential. What is consequential to me is the fact that Christians are attacking each other because the other belongs to another political party. Right now the Evangelical polarizers are abortion and gay marriage. Obviously, the Republicans are "against" that (or not), so the Republicans are godly and right. Which means the Democrats are evil. (I've heard this logic spoken in my workplace.) What would happen if we realized that the Republicans were pro-life for unborn babies, whereas the Democrats are pro-life for basically everyone else, including innocent Iraqis, American soldiers, the poor, etc.? If we had a single party that was consistently pro-life, I might become partisan.
However, I think I'll have to take my religious convictions and find the best middle way possible. I don't see a third party coming in to destabilize this inhuman behemoth that many have touted as the glorious Two-Party System. This leads me to my actual point, which is how Christians have sold out by making politics the important thing rather than engaging themselves as actors in the biblical story. I've started a class called "Reconciliation and the Healing of Persons," which is Systematic Theology 2 in a much more palatable form. I read a quote in one of the required books that answered the question at the lunch table yesterday: Shouldn't Christians take a stand for the appropriate party?
"I am concerned that the gap between theology and the church has become so great that most Christians actually know more about sports, hobbies, and national politics than they know about Christian doctrine. As a result, Christians often explain their faith in terms of their own experiences or political stances that they hold as Christians. They don’t know much about the gospel, and their knowledge of the gospel isn’t nearly as profound as their knowledge of other areas of life" (Jonathan R. Wilson, God So Loved the World, p 13).
We worry ourselves about many things, which are fine pursuits in themselves, but when sports or politics or some other gospel becomes the controlling metanarrative rather than the gospel of Jesus, I guarantee you'll end up with today's America.
In the biggest scheme, that may not be very consequential. What is consequential to me is the fact that Christians are attacking each other because the other belongs to another political party. Right now the Evangelical polarizers are abortion and gay marriage. Obviously, the Republicans are "against" that (or not), so the Republicans are godly and right. Which means the Democrats are evil. (I've heard this logic spoken in my workplace.) What would happen if we realized that the Republicans were pro-life for unborn babies, whereas the Democrats are pro-life for basically everyone else, including innocent Iraqis, American soldiers, the poor, etc.? If we had a single party that was consistently pro-life, I might become partisan.
However, I think I'll have to take my religious convictions and find the best middle way possible. I don't see a third party coming in to destabilize this inhuman behemoth that many have touted as the glorious Two-Party System. This leads me to my actual point, which is how Christians have sold out by making politics the important thing rather than engaging themselves as actors in the biblical story. I've started a class called "Reconciliation and the Healing of Persons," which is Systematic Theology 2 in a much more palatable form. I read a quote in one of the required books that answered the question at the lunch table yesterday: Shouldn't Christians take a stand for the appropriate party?
"I am concerned that the gap between theology and the church has become so great that most Christians actually know more about sports, hobbies, and national politics than they know about Christian doctrine. As a result, Christians often explain their faith in terms of their own experiences or political stances that they hold as Christians. They don’t know much about the gospel, and their knowledge of the gospel isn’t nearly as profound as their knowledge of other areas of life" (Jonathan R. Wilson, God So Loved the World, p 13).
We worry ourselves about many things, which are fine pursuits in themselves, but when sports or politics or some other gospel becomes the controlling metanarrative rather than the gospel of Jesus, I guarantee you'll end up with today's America.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Apology
My first book for Sys Theo 2 is "Jesus Christ Our Lord: Christology from a Disciple's Perspective" by C. Norman Kraus. I ran across an amazing paragraph about apologetics:
"Of course apologetic theology has a valid and important work to do, but we should not expect too much from it. The apologist seeks to establish a position on the presuppositions of the opponent or to show why these presuppositions are wrong. Such an approach naturally leads to minimal rather then maximal statements. These minimal statements have value in defense of the Christian belief system, but they are hardly adequate to nurture and guide the full life of the church" (33).
My experience with apologetics has been pretty negative. I don't like the tone. I appreciate hearing a confession of its limitations from a theologian.
"Of course apologetic theology has a valid and important work to do, but we should not expect too much from it. The apologist seeks to establish a position on the presuppositions of the opponent or to show why these presuppositions are wrong. Such an approach naturally leads to minimal rather then maximal statements. These minimal statements have value in defense of the Christian belief system, but they are hardly adequate to nurture and guide the full life of the church" (33).
My experience with apologetics has been pretty negative. I don't like the tone. I appreciate hearing a confession of its limitations from a theologian.
Discipline
I finished my Church History final on Friday night, which means I now have my first seminary class under my belt! I worked my butt off last week studying for the final so that I didn't have to take my test in a panic to meet the deadline (as happened with my midterm). The studying went fairly well.
I was shooting to start the three hour exam at 8 pm so I could be in bed by 11, before the midnight deadline. I didn't quite meet that goal, but I started at 9 and e-mailed the test in about 11. I was so excited that I actually got something done an hour before the deadline! I would exactly call it early, but it was a major stride for me.
I'm going to build on that success this summer, since I'm taking two classes by distance learning. All course work is due 9/19, but I'm already panicky. I need to listen to forty hours of lecture and read 3,000 pages. And write four five-page papers and take two essay tests. Yikes.
The topics and books are interesting. I'm taking Systematic Theology 2: Reconciliation and the Healing of Persons, and Christian Ethics. I'vs at a Bible school, but the material I've encountered so far for these editions sounds far more intriguing.
Back to reading!
I was shooting to start the three hour exam at 8 pm so I could be in bed by 11, before the midnight deadline. I didn't quite meet that goal, but I started at 9 and e-mailed the test in about 11. I was so excited that I actually got something done an hour before the deadline! I would exactly call it early, but it was a major stride for me.
I'm going to build on that success this summer, since I'm taking two classes by distance learning. All course work is due 9/19, but I'm already panicky. I need to listen to forty hours of lecture and read 3,000 pages. And write four five-page papers and take two essay tests. Yikes.
The topics and books are interesting. I'm taking Systematic Theology 2: Reconciliation and the Healing of Persons, and Christian Ethics. I'vs at a Bible school, but the material I've encountered so far for these editions sounds far more intriguing.
Back to reading!
A normalizing commute
After all the flats last week, I'm happy to report that my commute by bike and bus has become fairly routine. One funny story from one of the flats, though.
I have to ride about a mile to my bus stop after work. Given all my flats, I took off early, like twenty minutes early. Good thing I did. After less than a quarter mile, the tire went flaccid. I knew I had to hustle to make the bus, so I hopped off and started walking quickly. I watched the time and gauged the distance. I knew I was on the losing end. Once I got off the main thoroughfare, I started running, with my backpack, pushing my bike. I think I ran about a quarter of a mile this way. Keep in mind, there was a computer and a fat history textbook in my backpack. So this was desperation. I saw the bus sitting at the stop, waiting for its appointed departure moment. When I was about seventy-five yards from the stop, the bus pulled out. I kept running, but this time waving frantically for the bus to stop. Mercifully, the driver stopped. Because of all the wheezing, I didn't appreciate his snide remark until later, but he said, "I hope you can find a seat." There were two other people on the bus.
I have to ride about a mile to my bus stop after work. Given all my flats, I took off early, like twenty minutes early. Good thing I did. After less than a quarter mile, the tire went flaccid. I knew I had to hustle to make the bus, so I hopped off and started walking quickly. I watched the time and gauged the distance. I knew I was on the losing end. Once I got off the main thoroughfare, I started running, with my backpack, pushing my bike. I think I ran about a quarter of a mile this way. Keep in mind, there was a computer and a fat history textbook in my backpack. So this was desperation. I saw the bus sitting at the stop, waiting for its appointed departure moment. When I was about seventy-five yards from the stop, the bus pulled out. I kept running, but this time waving frantically for the bus to stop. Mercifully, the driver stopped. Because of all the wheezing, I didn't appreciate his snide remark until later, but he said, "I hope you can find a seat." There were two other people on the bus.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
No more flats? Please?
I made it to work this morning with no flat tires after five in three days. I'm pinching myself, and my tires, to make sure I'm not dreaming.
I think my friend who worked in a bike shop nailed (so to speak) the problem for me. I have soft-walled mountain bike tires, and I was underinflating them. Hopefully that was the problem and I'll go 2000 miles without another flat, as Mark noted. (Thanks for your suggestions, Mark. I'll keep those in mind in case I do have another flat, God forbid. By the way, what's the wrong way to take the pump off? Or the right way, rather?)
In other news, my first seminary class is almost under my belt. I have to turn in my final by midnight on Friday. I haven't studied enough, but I feel fairly confident about my knowledge of the topic. I'm going to immerse myself today and part of tomorrow in European Reformations.
I got all my books for the two independent study classes I'm taking this summer (Reconciliation and the Healing of Persons/Sys Theo 2 and Christian Ethics). I have until mid-September to listen to about forty hours of lecture and read at least 2250 pages. I'll probably need to read closer to 3000 pages. Yikes. Better get on that.
I think my friend who worked in a bike shop nailed (so to speak) the problem for me. I have soft-walled mountain bike tires, and I was underinflating them. Hopefully that was the problem and I'll go 2000 miles without another flat, as Mark noted. (Thanks for your suggestions, Mark. I'll keep those in mind in case I do have another flat, God forbid. By the way, what's the wrong way to take the pump off? Or the right way, rather?)
In other news, my first seminary class is almost under my belt. I have to turn in my final by midnight on Friday. I haven't studied enough, but I feel fairly confident about my knowledge of the topic. I'm going to immerse myself today and part of tomorrow in European Reformations.
I got all my books for the two independent study classes I'm taking this summer (Reconciliation and the Healing of Persons/Sys Theo 2 and Christian Ethics). I have until mid-September to listen to about forty hours of lecture and read at least 2250 pages. I'll probably need to read closer to 3000 pages. Yikes. Better get on that.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Flat!
And again. And again!
Yesterday morning on my way to the bus stop, I got a flat on my front tire. Thankfully, I was close, so I didn't take time to fix it. I made it to work, and it turns out it was unfixable. The valve stem was coming loose from the tube. So a friend drove me to the store to get a new tube.
Everything was kosher till this morning when my tire went flat again, this time a little further from the bus stop. I ran for a bit (with my bike and backpack), since I needed to get this bus to make it to a dentist appointment. I didn't have the heart (or the legs) to go all the way around to the bus stop, so I trespassed through a construction area. I made it on time, thankfully.
After the dentist, I tried to fix the tire. I heard some air escaping near the valve stem (again). I took it apart again, and after putting it together, it seemed stable. I started riding up the sidewalk, watching it carefully. I made it about half a mile before it deflated again. I tried to simply pump it up since that seemed to work the last time. It wasn't working at all. A kind young woman in a Prius pulled up to see if I needed help. I asked if she could give me a ride, and she agreed. I think I'll trade my bike in for a Prius. Anybody know the trade in value?
Yesterday morning on my way to the bus stop, I got a flat on my front tire. Thankfully, I was close, so I didn't take time to fix it. I made it to work, and it turns out it was unfixable. The valve stem was coming loose from the tube. So a friend drove me to the store to get a new tube.
Everything was kosher till this morning when my tire went flat again, this time a little further from the bus stop. I ran for a bit (with my bike and backpack), since I needed to get this bus to make it to a dentist appointment. I didn't have the heart (or the legs) to go all the way around to the bus stop, so I trespassed through a construction area. I made it on time, thankfully.
After the dentist, I tried to fix the tire. I heard some air escaping near the valve stem (again). I took it apart again, and after putting it together, it seemed stable. I started riding up the sidewalk, watching it carefully. I made it about half a mile before it deflated again. I tried to simply pump it up since that seemed to work the last time. It wasn't working at all. A kind young woman in a Prius pulled up to see if I needed help. I asked if she could give me a ride, and she agreed. I think I'll trade my bike in for a Prius. Anybody know the trade in value?
Friday, June 6, 2008
Bus update
This morning, I actually biked the trip to WalMart to catch the bus. I made it in time, thankfully, but it wore me out!
Last night I was riding to the stop about half a mile from work, and I saw my bus driving by. Somehow, they saw fit to leave about five minutes early. I waved, and they kept going. I was about a hundred yards from the stop. Last bus for the night too. Not happy.
If I keep taking the 6:17 bus in the morning, I'll get the same driver for the rest of the month. I'm pretty motivated to keep dragging out at 5:20 in order to make this happen. She's really nice, and she even stops about a quarter mile from my workplace. Yesterday I was chatting with some talkative guys, and they asked my major in college. I noted "linguistics." This pleased the Classical Academy Latin teacher. When I was getting off the bus, the driver asked what my major was again because she thought I said "statistics" or "ballistics." She couldn't figure out why that was so meaningful to the Latin teacher.
Oh, what I could do with some ballistics training right now . . .
Last night I was riding to the stop about half a mile from work, and I saw my bus driving by. Somehow, they saw fit to leave about five minutes early. I waved, and they kept going. I was about a hundred yards from the stop. Last bus for the night too. Not happy.
If I keep taking the 6:17 bus in the morning, I'll get the same driver for the rest of the month. I'm pretty motivated to keep dragging out at 5:20 in order to make this happen. She's really nice, and she even stops about a quarter mile from my workplace. Yesterday I was chatting with some talkative guys, and they asked my major in college. I noted "linguistics." This pleased the Classical Academy Latin teacher. When I was getting off the bus, the driver asked what my major was again because she thought I said "statistics" or "ballistics." She couldn't figure out why that was so meaningful to the Latin teacher.
Oh, what I could do with some ballistics training right now . . .
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Baptism
This is totally not what you think it is. I'm talking about sprinkling . . . as I rode my bike into work today. Given exorbitant gas prices, I figure I'll do my part to lessen demand. So today was my first day taking the bus. I've never ridden the bus in this town, and it's not terribly convenient for me. From the house, I have to ride my bike about four miles to WalMart. Then at the other end, I will typically need to ride my bike a little more than a mile. The driver this morning was really nice and took an unplanned stop where I only needed to ride about a quarter of a mile. This was merciful given the icy rain falling. The odd thing is, it only rains in the morning about twice a year here. Therefore, I count this a christening of saving money, gas, etc. I'm just glad it wasn't immersion.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Devilish names
Michel de L'Hôpital had a similar comment to Sebastian Franck (see May 23 below) about naming others: "We must henceforth . . . assail our enemies with charity, prayer, persuasion and the word of God, which are the proper weapons for such a conflict. . . . Sweetness will achieve more than severity. And let us banish those devilish names--"Lutheran," "Huguenot," "Papist"--which breed only faction and sedition; let us retain only one name: "Christian" (from Lindberg, The European Reformations Sourcebook, p. 195.).
Word games
We had a meeting the other day where we talked about how the modern church has used numbers (i.e., chapters and verses) to help quantify the Bible. We've turned the Bible's different genres into one: proverbs. This allows us to quote with certainty some snippet from the Bible, ignoring its true point(s). My boss noted that this was a Cartesian use of the Bible. Definite certainty, no open questions, [sing along] I've got the whole world . . . in my hands, I've got the whole world [stop singing]. My verbal mind started playing with the word "Cartesian." [No, really, I meant it, stop singing!] So I noted, probably to the group's chagrin, that the Cartesian approach to Scripture is opposed to the courtesan approach, where storytelling would happen before the king by jesters or bards. No doubt, kings needed certainty, but before the 1500s, they didn't rely on Enlightenment Rationalism to tell them how to think. They were comfortable with the ambiguity of a story, where good guys could be a little bad and vice versa. [Ha! The song's stuck in your head! I'm not sorry!] This courtesan approach is much more true to life and the world than a Cartesian approach. There's room for empirical data, but when we approach life, the world and the Bible from an empirical mindset, we're guaranteed to screw it up. How do you approach the Bible? As a Cartesian or a courtesan?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)