Sing Praises

Psalm 47:5 God has ascended amid shouts of joy, the Lord amid the sounding of trumpets. 6 Sing praises to God, sing praises; sing praises to our King, sing praises. 7 For God is the King of all the earth; sing to him a psalm of praise.

I have the honor this day of continuing the tradition of praise and worship at my church. This is something that my church is known for, and many people remark on the intensity of the worship at my church. It is exciting and humbling to be able to continue this tradition.

I read the above psalm this week, and I noticed something that I had never seen before. You know how in the Bible, if the speaker wants to emphasize something they say it twice ("Truly, truly I say to you"), and if they really want to emphasize it, they say it three times ("Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty")? Look at verse 6 above. Twice the psalmist says to sing praises to God, and twice he says to sing praises to our King. But in verse 7 he ties it together that God is our King, and so he told us four times to sing praises to Him! That's emphasis!

For God is King of all the earth. He is certainly and undeniably worthy of all of our praise. Sing praises!

Jessica Latshaw interview

Continuing in my role as a member of the Jessica Latshaw fan club, here is an interview that Jessica gave to Joan Dylan at radio station WRCH.

Thankful

For the first time in ten days, I slept through the night and got woken up by my alarm clock. You might not think that being woken by your alarm clock is something to be thankful for, but what has been happening is that I have been waking up from my throat hurting or from coughing and going downstairs to sleep sitting up somewhere. Last night I slept all night in my own bed through the whole night. I feel like a parent with a baby, except, of course, I'm the baby.

So, I'm thankful that I was able to sleep the whole night.

Mindful of him

A verse for my birthday:

Job 7:16 I loathe [my life]; I would not live alway: Let me alone; for my days are vanity. (ASV)

You may laugh, but there was a time when this was the type of thoughts that I used to have on my birthday. In those days, my birthday was a day of mourning and sorrow.

But I digress. I found this verse in the ASV because I was looking for the word "vanity" in Ecclesiastes. The verse above is followed by these verses:

Job 7:17 What is man, that thou shouldest magnify him, And that thou shouldest set thy mind upon him, 18 And that thou shouldest visit him every morning, And try him every moment? 19 How long wilt thou not look away from me, Nor let me alone till I swallow down my spittle?

The NIV puts it thus:

17 "What is man that you make so much of him, that you give him so much attention, 18 that you examine him every morning and test him every moment? 19 Will you never look away from me, or let me alone even for an instant?

This put me in mind of another Scripture:

Psalm 8:4 what is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? 5 You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. (NIV)

I found this remarkable - that the same idea ("what is man") led to two different expressions, one of despair, and one of awe:

What is man that you, God, make so much of him, that you pester him so?
What is man that you, God, make so much of him, that you lift him up so high?

David redeemed Job's thought. He took the same idea, and changed it from a reason to despair to a reason to rejoice. A good reminder that perspective and attitude matter.

Even concerning ones' birthday.

Jessica on Washington DC Local News!

I found two cuts of this video, this one is a little longer but the other has the sound drop out at one point.



Here's the link.

Ill again

This week, I am ill. I felt it start Saturday, but foolishly decided to go to the church work day anyway.  Last Sunday I got a sore throat and lost my voice. Monday morning around 1AM I woke up with my throat in so much pain that I couldn't sleep - it hurt all the time, and when I swallowed it was like swallowing razor blades.

(Swallowing became this mean little game for me. On the one hand, I didn't want to be in pain. On the other, I became very conscious of a need to swallow, and of an obsessive little curiosity about the pain - was it still there? Will it decrease if I swallow a lot? Gulp. OWW! I guess not.)

Tuesday wasn't any better, and so I called my doctor - or, rather, had the wife call, since I couldn't carry on a conversation. First opening was Wednesday morning, so I got over there.

"Yup, you're ill. Might be strep. If it is strep, here is a prescription for antibiotics - you can take it now, or wait for the strep test to get back. If it isn't strep, not much to do besides numb the pain, lower the fever, drink fluids. Strep test should be back Friday."

Wednesday night I developed a cough - my throat was so raw, it tickled all the time. Then I couldn't sleep because of the cough.

Finally, here, on Friday, I feel like I am getting better. I am still running a slight fever (about a half degree), but the pain when I swallow is tolerable, and I can sleep without waking myself up from swallowing or coughing.

But what is it with this illness? I don't normally get this ill. I was also ill for 10 days over the last Christmas holiday as well. It's just weird - I feel like a little kid again, with these long illnesses.  It's also a little nerve-wracking to be out of work this long these days. Fortunately, I got a lot of big projects out of the way just before this happened.

I often feel distant from God, but when I am ill I have little interest in spiritual things, other than to throw up a "please make me well" prayer. I pull in, just wanting to be by myself, conserving resources, comforting myself.

I'm glad that he sticks with me anyway, though I don't understand why.

Submission

I have about three posts-in-progress, but I've been so busy that none of them have gotten to a stage where I can actually post them.

So, instead, I will submit this thought.

I've been reading the Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis. I first read it about 25 years ago (yes, I'm old).  One thought that came to me as I'm reading it is that one of the greatest dangers to the soul is that we are able to function quite nicely without being submitted. Rather than be afraid of a God who is too tyrannical, we should be concerned lest we take his lax and distant rule too much for granted. Because one day our unconditional surrender will be demanded of us, and we will need to be able to give it.  And not just "yes, you are Lord" - but true surrender, acknowledgement of His headship over every aspect of our lives. No sin held onto, no pride allowed to stand, no unforgiveness retained. Give it all up, in a moment.

I guess, in one sense, that is why it is good to work on that submission here and now.

But maybe we will get a second chance, like in the Great Divorce.

Creationists and Theory

Isaac Asimov is one of my favorite authors.  I loved his stuff when I was a kid, and still enjoy reading and re-reading his science fiction.

Here is a quote by him which I find amusing because it is true:

Creationists make it sound like a ‘theory’ is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.
— Isaac Asimov

The illustrative tale of Charlie

Every two weeks I have a creative writing project, which other people might refer to as "Peaj's email reminder about Bible Study this week." I try to make it interesting because, you know, who needs to read another "Same Bat-time, same Bat-channel"-type of email?  Since the post I have in the back of my mind about Jesus as a priest in the order of Melchizedek isn't really going anywhere (I have, maybe, two sentences), I thought that I would repurpose (fancy corporate-speak for "ripoff") the email I wrote this morning for the blog.

One day Charlie was just kinda bopping along, in that bopping-along way that he had.

So who is Charlie?
I'll get to that. Just go with it.
I think you should establish your characters before you tell stories about them.
Quit it, will you? Gosh! You're so judgemental!
You spelled "judgmental" wrong.
Shut up!

Anyway, Charlie was bopping along, minding the business that was his, when a large piece of paper floated down toward him.

Oh, like that would happen.
Just listen, will you? It will make sense.
Whatever.

This large piece of paper had writing on it. "Ark" and "lampstand" and "Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here." Yes it was a copy of Hebrews chapter 9.

Just floating out of the sky?
Yes, just floating down. Now quiet, or I'll send you away!
Ooh, I'm scared.

Unfortunately, Charlie didn't realize that it was Hebrews chapter 9, and so he moved on by it. You see, Charlie couldn't read.

Is this some sort of strange public service announcement?
Will you quit it?
I'm just trying to get where you are going with this.
Can't you take a break from analyzing everything for just one minute?
You know, mom never really liked you either.
Arrgg!

A few seconds later, a large shape loomed out of the fog, and swallowed Charlie in one gulp. A huge fish had eaten Charlie. You see, Charlie was a fish too.

That's weird. And there is no fog under water.
I'm ignoring you. La la la la.

So, the moral is clear: Come to Bible Study, and avoid being eaten by a fish. Bible Study will be this Sunday at about 12:45 PM.

That's your moral?
Can't hear you.

Sorry, Charlie.

OK, that was cute, if a bit obscure.

---

I think that this was a little bit inspired by the self-heckling comedy of Jim Gaffigan.

Judging

This post was sparked by this post from friend and fellow blogger, Jessica.

First, some Scriptures:

Jesus said:
Mt 7:1 - Do not judge, or you too will be judged.

Lu 6:37 - "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.

Paul said:
Col 2:16 - Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.

1Co 5:12 - What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?

1Co 6:2 - Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!

God said:
Genesis 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

I pulled just a few Scriptures on judging - trust me, there are many more. As you can see, they are kind of a mixture. Jesus seems pretty absolute: "Do not judge." Paul says "Don't allow yourself to be judged." However, then he says that we are to judge those inside the church (while adjuring us to not judge those outside the church). He then later says that we are to judge things of this life.

So why did I include the Scripture from Genesis 2?

My theory is that our propensity to judge goes back to the original sin. I think that the knowledge of good and evil drives us to judge - to divide everything into this black and white thinking of "this thing is good, this thing is evil." We weren't meant to handle this ability, and that's why we mess it up so much.  I think that it is because of this propensity to judge that Jesus made the strong statements that he did.

Paul, on the other hand, is talking to the church, and part of his concern is church administration. In this context, it is appropriate to judge what is right and wrong, so that correction can be brought. How can a church leader speak against lying or stealing or slander if he or she is not allowed to judge these actions to be wrong? Isn't it necessary, then, to judge in some contexts?

Here is how I reconcile these ideas. I think that as a Christian that we are to discern right from wrong. But I think that what Jesus is saying is "Love, do not despise."  I think that he is speaking against is the separation of our heart from a person that we have judged, but not against recognizing what actions offend God. This is similar to the idea of judging the action, not the person.  The sin, not the sinner.

Easy to say, in theory. Very difficult in practice. What I have found is that the roots of the original sin are so deep in us that we fall into the practice of judging very easily. How easy it is to just dismiss a person, to classify them in our minds as "one of those people."  How easy it is, too, to spread these judgments to other people for noble ends, "to warn them, to protect them." How often do we see prominent or not-so-prominent Christian leaders or sites on the web rendering a judgment on this or that person, to inform their viewers? How often they claim to be doing this for Christian reasons! Sometimes I think that if these discernments want to be seen as Christian that they should include a disclaimer, like:

"WARNING: The preceding discussion is given for informational purposes only, to inform your prayer. You are not to judge the person or persons named therein. Judgment is a sin. If you say to the object of this message 'You fool!', you will be in danger of the fire of hell. (Matt 5:22). You are not to use this information to gossip about this person(s), defame them, or despise them. Instead, your goal should be to pray for this person(s) and to love them. Again, love them. Anything less is unworthy of Christ."

Another thing that Jess's post brings up is our American concepts of what a spiritual life looks like.  To many, a spiritual life is one spent in total service to the church. Anything else is second (or third or fourth) best. I think that the person that wrote to Jess probably saw her as someone who was on a trajectory to have a career in the church, and that she "settled" or got distracted into something less. Want to be a dancer or an actor or a screenwriter or a computer support person? Do it for the church!

I confess that I fall into this trap as well, sometimes concerning other people, but mostly concerning myself. I judge myself as being less spiritual because I work a corporate job. But really, I, like Jess, feel that God opened doors to get me to my current position. And I do not see a precedent in the New Testament for every person who became a believer to give up their current occupation to do Christian ministry. Instead, there is an admonission to remain in your current situation (1 Corinthians 7:17-21). Truth is, Christians can be true Christians without working jobs within the church.

President's Day

It's President's Day, and I am off work.  In honor of our Presidents, here are some fun facts about our Presidents. These are drawn from the book Stupid History: Tales of Stupidity, Strangeness, and Mythconceptions Throughout the Ages, which my daughter, showing a keen insight into the interests of her father, gave me for Valentines Day.

• Some people claim that David Rice Atchison was President of the United States for one day. James Polk's term of office ended at noon on Sunday, March 4, 1849. Zachary Taylor was due to be sworn in that day, but he refused to be sworn in on the Sabbath, and his Vice President followed suit; both of their inaugurations were scheduled for the next day. Since Atchison was President pro tempore of the Senate, he was thus next in line and was therefore President for one day. Family legend has it that he slept through the day, making this a great lead in for me making a crack about him being the most effective President ever, if I were inclined to disrespect the office of the President.

• From no president to two: Rutherford B. Hayes (I guess we always include the "B." to distinguish him from all the other "Rutherford Hayes" who have been President) had been beaten in the general election by Samuel Tilden (losers don't get a middle initial), but Hayes was elected President by one electoral vote.  Tensions were high and there was a fear that supporters of Tilden would disrupt the inauguration, so Hayes, then-President Ulysses S. Grant (I guess we include the "S." blah blah blah) and Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite (I guess blah blah "R." blah blah) snuck off to administer the oath of office to Hayes the day before the inauguration, which also happened to be several hours before Grant's term ended.  Does this mean that Rutherford B. and Ulysses S. were both President until Grant's term expired?  I'm no lawyer, but if  it doesn't, it doesn't really matter; it's still an interesting piece of history.

• President Franklin Pierce was arrested in 1853 - during his term of office - for running down a lady with his horse. He was probably drunk at the time.

• The Chicago Times didn't like the Gettysburg Address. Here is what they said about it:

The cheek of every American must tingle with shame as he reads the silly, flat and dish-watery utterances of the man who has been pointed out to intelligent foreigners as the President of the United States.

• Stupid History also informs that President Lincoln did not have the deep, resonant voice that the movies would have us believe, but that he had a high, shrill voice - a voice perfect for being heard long distances during open-air debates with no amplification.

So there you have it. Happy President's Day!

The unexamined life

"The unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates

I used to always examine my life. How was I doing? Where was I going? I almost always found my life to be lacking. I seemed to be full of, even defined by, my shortcomings. Everywhere I looked in my life I found failure, deficiencies, and squandered opportunities.

Accordingly, I was often depressed.  And, oddly enough, neither the poor personal report cards nor the depression led to a better life or better behavior.

Somewhere along the way, I learned two things: 1) That God doesn't want me to sorrow over my failures, unless it is the type of sorrow that leads to righteousness (2Corinthians 7:10 - Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death), and 2) a lot of bad feelings have a biochemical source.

Let me explain the second one a little: I discovered that I often feel depressed after eating a lot of sugar. Before I realized this, when I felt this way I would cast about, looking for the cause, and inevitably hit upon what was bad in my life or what I had recently failed in. I would then conclude that the reason I felt bad was because of the things that I had identified.  But they weren't the cause; the sugar low was.

What I have learned, then, is that there are some ways in which it is not so good to examine my life. If I feel bad, I don't have to hunt around for a reason.  If I feel less than peppy, I don't have to conclude that it is because I am awful or unloved.  Sometimes, it is better to just say, "I feel bad. I don't know why, and I am not going to search for why. I am, instead, going to trust that if God really wants to tell me something, he will let me know explicitly, and won't just give me a bad feeling."

I had this experience this morning.  I dragged into church. I felt tired, unloved, unspiritual, and fearful of people.  Many people really got into worship today, but I was not one of them.  I had the luxury of not leading worship today, and I felt that to force myself to worship hard would do violence to my soul, and so I just sat.  Initially I started down the route of blaming my shortcomings, but then I realized that this was that type of generalized down feeling that is related to consuming lots of sugar the day before. So I just accepted where I was at, and waited it out. I thought about different things (I'm little ashamed to say that one of them was television shows I've recently seen) and resisted the urge to flee the room.

And hey, I made it. Here I am, not caught up in depressing thoughts, and ready to lead worship tonight. So it seems that holding off from examining myself was a good thing.

1Corinthinas 4:3 I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. 4 My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.

Dreamless

I've been thinking about Sunday's teaching on dreams for the Kingdom. If you missed it, what I got out of it (and this is probably totally wrong) is that God gives us visions for what we'd like to see happen in the Kingdom, and that we should pursue dreams in the knowledge that God will give us the power to fulfill them.

Now, maybe I'm wrong, but when I hear dream, I think something along the lines of big accomplishment, with the dreamer at the center.  Like, ending poverty in the tristate area or being the motive force behind ending slavery worldwide.  So, when I was asked Sunday afternoon what my dreams were, I said that I didn't really have any.

Possibly that isn't exactly true. There are some things that I have passion for, but they are sort of nonspecific. I have a desire to worship and to aid other people in worship. I don't really have a vision for the endstate of what I want worship to be like or to become - just that I want to do it and gather more people into doing it.  I love talking about the fundamentals of the faith and of helping people understand them, but I don't have a specific goal in mind with this. Do these qualify as dreams?

I don't know. I know that this isn't what Jonathan said on Sunday, but the whole idea of dreams and goals as believers smacks to me as an Americanization (or, maybe, an American Idolization) of the Gospel.  It makes me feel like the church is saying something like "you can be a star, too, just in the church!"

In the New Testament we certainly have the examples of Paul and Timothy and Barnabas pursing their individual destinies in the Kingdom - but what about the thousands and thousands of other believers?  Did Paul exhort them to pursue their dreams?  Is saying "pursue your dreams" the same as saying "now in the Body there are many parts"?  Isn't the emphasis in the epistles much more on community and not on individual accomplishment? It seems to me that what Paul emphasized was more sacrificing of the individual to the greater good.

Maybe I am reading too much into this, or misinterpreting this.  I look forward to your take on this.

Fireproof

The missus and I saw the movie Fireproof last fall during our anniversary. If you are not familiar with the movie, it is the story of how a couple was on the brink of divorce, and how a challenge of self sacrifice from the husband's father led to the husband's conversion to Christianity and the eventual winning back of his wife.

I thought that it was a well done movie. It might not sound like it from the above description, but I thought that the movie was convincing in the way it portrayed the reality of the relationships involved.  There were no magic answers, and the characters were believeably selfish, short-sighted and resistant to change.  The solution wasn't as easy as saying "Now I shall be self-sacrificing" - there was real struggle involved.  I found the movie very, well, moving.  I'm pretty easily affected by any movie or TV show where the characters actually show humility and say "I'm sorry," and so I cried several times during the movie.

The wife loved it so much that she preordered the DVD, and is organizing a private party of friends and our kids to watch the movie together. I heard her on the phone asking people to this showing, and apparently she thought that it would be a great selling point to relate how I had to fight "openingly sobbing" during the movie.  Now, come on, I know that a man being able to express and embrace his emotions is a good thing. But does anybody, guy or not, want to be known to all his or her friends as the one who couldn't keep it together during a movie, whether true or not?  I finally asked her to stop selling the movie that way.  Sheesh.

Now I need to face all these people when we watch this movie together.  Will I cry a lot?  Will they be watching me to see if I cry?  Will I embarrass myself?  Maybe I should go on the offensive before the movie starts.  "Where are the Kleenexes?  Watch out, I'm going to start bawling like a baby during the previews!"

Anyway, it is a good movie. I do recommend it to anyone who wants to see what sacrificial love can do.

Oh, and just so you know: I love my darling wife. If anything you read here seems to imply that I don't completely respect her or that I think ill of her, then you read it wrong.

Obey him

At my Sunday Bible Study, we worked over these two verses, which speak of Jesus:

Hebrews 5:8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him.

Obviously, verse eight is a bit of a puzzle (how can Jesus, the perfect image of God, be deficient in any way, such that he needs to learn obedience?), but I want to focus on verse nine.  Most of my contemporaries either grew up in or are familiar with Protestant theology, with its focus on salvation through faith. Having grown up Lutheran, I am very familiar with the idea of Sola fide - that salvation is through faith alone. These verses are often used for justification of this position:

Ephesians 2:8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.

Yet here, in Hebrews 5:9, it says that Jesus is the source of salvation for all who obey him. (Incidentally, this verse is to me evidence that the writer of Hebrews was not Paul.) Though not a necessary interpretation, one possible interpretation of this verse is that obeying Jesus is a prerequisite for salvation.

If so, what obedience is needed for salvation?  Is it the Law? Is it the Greatest Commandment? Well, I immediately thought about what Jesus said in John 15:

John 15:10 If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love. [...] 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.

So, to put it together, Jesus is our source of salvation if we obey his command to love one another.  Note that he is speaking to believers, so I think that it is reasonable to say that his command is to especially, if not exclusively, love other believers.

If this is so, think of how critical it is that we love each other.  It is the foundation of our relationship with God. Our very salvation depends upon it!  And yet, how often do we sacrifice love to other things, like moral standards, perfect theology, or even our own comfort.  Don't we judge and hold ourselves apart from those who have publickly sinned or whose theology we find flawed?  Think of how many times you have heard or read vitriolic criticism of a prominent or famous person from someone not personally acquainted with that person.  Do a Google or YouTube search of Benny Hinn, or Rick Warren, or other prominent Christians, and you will find pages dedicated to their faults and failings.  Is this loving? Is this how we should treat other believers? Is this how we want to be treated? Jesus gives very specific instructions on how to deal with other Christians who have sinned:

Matthew 18:15 "If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. 16 "But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. 17 "If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (NAS)

If we think someone has sinned, Jesus wants us to try and settle it quietly between us first.  To do otherwise isn't obeying Jesus guidelines for how we are to treat each other, and so I think that this means that our actions are unloving.

Are we putting our salvation in jeopardy if we don't follow this model for dealing with the sins of other believers?

How important is it to love other believers - is it necessary for salvation?

Titanium Baby

In an earlier post, I wrote about how I was focused on the fragility of a newborn baby and how this demonstrates the humility of God.

I've been thinking about this idea, though, and I wonder how fragile Jesus really was. A cursory web search brought up the statistics that during Roman times that 5-10 percent of all births ended in the death of the mother, and infant mortality rate was about 20%. I don't know if things were significantly different for practicing Jews, but I doubt that it was much different. Obviously, both Jesus and Mary survived his birth, despite this statistic and despite what may have been extremely unsanitary and otherwise unfavorable conditions.

Later, God derailed Herod's plan to kill Jesus by warning Joseph in a dream, so that the family could escape. During his ministry, Jesus avoided stoning and other physical harm several times, seeming to be able to slip through angry mobs at will (see John 10:39, Luke 4:29-30). In addition, there is a scripture (Psalms 91:11-12) that says that angels will protect the Messiah against him striking his foot on a stone; this Scripture is quoted to Jesus by Satan during the temptation in the wilderness (Matthew 4:5-6).

All this to ask: could Jesus be hurt before his trial? Does it make sense that God would allow the possibility of harm coming to him? And even if he could technically be hurt (say, by soldiers killing all of the children in a town) and yet avoided that fate through supernatural means, wasn't it the same, practically, as if he couldn't be hurt? Instead of fragile and weak Jesus, was he, instead, invincible?

Was Jesus the Titanium Baby? I think that it is an interesting philosophical question. However, even if Jesus was incapable of being harmed, I still think that his birth as a human baby continues to show the humility of God.