I just listened to most of the president's speech at the Notre Dame graduation. I turned to Fox News, and there it was. Fox was fair and balanced in its discussion of the speech afterward. In fact, the pro-Obama spokesman was very good, in spite of my disagreement with his conclusions.
It is unusual for me to watch the president's speeches. I would rather read the text than listen to them.
One reason for this is that listening to him tends to upset me. I have to bring my strong reactions to what he says under control.
But, he had some good things to say in this speech (as he often does). The only problem was that I kept asking myself (and him): "DO YOU EVER LISTEN TO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?"
I found it hard to listen to him, even though what he was saying was good. He talked about all of us having respect for others, even when we differ. He recognized the difficulties of some of the choices that we face. He said that we should not demonize each other when we have sharp differences of conviction about issues such as abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and similar things. He said that we should not caricature the positions of others when we differ with them.
But then I REMEMBER THAT HE DOES THE VERY THINGS HE URGES US NOT TO DO.
In this speech, he caricatured the position of those who oppose embryonic stem cell research by speaking of those who oppose stem cell research, as if the two positions are the same. I suppose there may be some who oppose stem cell research of any kind - but I have not heard of them. I know of many who support stem cell research, but oppose embryonic stem cell research - that is, securing stem cells from aborted children or from embryos created "in a dish" for the purpose of impregnating a woman who could not have children the old fashioned way. He has not, to my knowledge, ever acknowledged that stem cells are available from other sources: adults, placenta material, and (with special treatment), from skin cells.
His administration has demonized those who oppose abortion as being particularly susceptible to becoming home-grown terrorists. In this, the pro-life position is lumped with others such as disgruntled military personnel who are returning from war-zone tours of duty who are said to be open to recruitment by extremists who want to overthrow the government of the United States of America.
He talked about hard choices - but wants to shut down debate. What was so urgent about passing a "stimulus bill" that it had to be done immediately - before a single congressman or senator (except perhaps some on the reconciliation committee) had the opportunity to read the bill in its entirety - and then sit on the president's desk over a long week-end before he signed it. Was the bill so important - or was there fear on the part of the president and his party that if the nation found out what was really in the bill, the outcry would be so great he might not have been able to get it passed?
What about respect for those who differ? Does he practice what he preaches? Why does he want to, at least in some instances, require doctors and hospitals to perform procedures [read abortions] that violate the consciences of the people involved? To require such is tyranny. The pro-abortion people have long argued that to abort or not to abort is a decision to be left to a woman and her doctor. Is the doctor to have no say in the matter? Must he perform the abortion if the woman insists? Where is the respect for the doctor in this?
So, I have trouble listening to the fair words and smooth speeches of this president. I cannot hear his words because his actions are so loud in my ear.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?
A friend recently sent me an email:
"WOW! you must watch this… This will absolutely blow
your mind. An interesting presentation given to Sony
executives at their last meeting...
http://www.flixxy.com/technology-and-education-2008.htms
(cut and paste the URL for a 5 minute show)
After watching the 5 minute show, I replied:
Very interesting! But the key question came at the very end: WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?
I think of two statments, one by Solomon and the other by John.
"Of the making of many books, there is no end."
"There are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."
Neither the speed of computation nor the amount of data available can impart wisdom. What it can do is to provide liars with more statistics to overwhelm us with their lies. (Figures don't lie, but liars figure!) This massive amount of information can give an appearance of wisdom without substance.
Yes, let's use the tools technology provides - but understand that the individual human mind is bombarded by these millions of bits of informatiion every day. With what result? Many times we just become so overwhelmed we drop out of the process of thinking.
It is in the face of all of this that we need to relearn the virtues of solitude, silence and meditation as spiritual disciplines. "Come apart and rest a while," said the Lord.
Perhaps we need to listen.
"WOW! you must watch this… This will absolutely blow
your mind. An interesting presentation given to Sony
executives at their last meeting...
http://www.flixxy.com/technology-and-education-2008.htms
(cut and paste the URL for a 5 minute show)
After watching the 5 minute show, I replied:
Very interesting! But the key question came at the very end: WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?
I think of two statments, one by Solomon and the other by John.
"Of the making of many books, there is no end."
"There are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."
Neither the speed of computation nor the amount of data available can impart wisdom. What it can do is to provide liars with more statistics to overwhelm us with their lies. (Figures don't lie, but liars figure!) This massive amount of information can give an appearance of wisdom without substance.
Yes, let's use the tools technology provides - but understand that the individual human mind is bombarded by these millions of bits of informatiion every day. With what result? Many times we just become so overwhelmed we drop out of the process of thinking.
It is in the face of all of this that we need to relearn the virtues of solitude, silence and meditation as spiritual disciplines. "Come apart and rest a while," said the Lord.
Perhaps we need to listen.
Monday, March 23, 2009
SKYPE
Isn't technology grand?
With a free downloaded Skype program, provided by Google, I can talk to my sister-in-law in New Zealand for not much more than 2 cents per minute! If she had skype on her computer (and a high-speed connection), I could talk with her for free.
I can be part of a tele-conference (with audio and visual) from my laptop anywhere I can get a wi-fi connection to the internet - and it costs nothing!
Why worry about having a vision-phone (land-line), which I'm sure will cost plenty, when I can do all of this on SKYPE free or at a very nominal charge if I'm calling a land-line (more to call a cell-phone).
Now, if I could just learn how to use this fool thing....
With a free downloaded Skype program, provided by Google, I can talk to my sister-in-law in New Zealand for not much more than 2 cents per minute! If she had skype on her computer (and a high-speed connection), I could talk with her for free.
I can be part of a tele-conference (with audio and visual) from my laptop anywhere I can get a wi-fi connection to the internet - and it costs nothing!
Why worry about having a vision-phone (land-line), which I'm sure will cost plenty, when I can do all of this on SKYPE free or at a very nominal charge if I'm calling a land-line (more to call a cell-phone).
Now, if I could just learn how to use this fool thing....
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
ALONE
Below is article 2 in a series by Richard Beck, Associate Professor and experimental psychologist at Abilene Christian University. This article is online at http://experimentaltheology.blogspot.com/2009/03/alone-suburban-sorted-part-2-church-and.html.
In recent discussions in our congregation, we asked how we can encourage more involvement. This article does not give answers, but does suggest that our problem is not unique. Somehow, we need to help the congregation see that we are a congregation of God’s people, that our service to God is not so individualistic that we operate alone. Yes, we must have an individual relationship to God – but this relationship is one of family and is shared by all who are part of God’s congregation. It is churches that foster the greatest sense of family that are growing, or at least that is my impression.
Alone, Suburban & Sorted: Part 2, Church and Politics
In Part 1 of Alone, Suburban & Sorted we noted that Americans are entertaining less and less in their own homes. In addition, Americans are withdrawing from informal recreational and social activities in their communities (e.g., bowling leagues). In this post we return to Bowling Alone to talk about trends affecting more formal social affiliations: Church and politics.
The big point I want to highlight from Putnam's analysis is the "hollowing out" of political and religious life. On the surface one can measure religious and political participation by watching the simplest of barometers, voting and church attendance. Both of those numbers have been declining. Since the 1960s, voter turnout has been steadily dropping. Zeroing in, this decline has been the steepest for local elections, primaries, and non-presidential election cycles. That is, interest in local politics--the politics of my town, schools and neighborhood--has seen the steepest declines in voter engagement. Again, this is a sign of social impoverishment at the neighborhood level.
Moving from voting to church attendance we see a similar decline in participation. From the 1930s to the 1960s church membership was rising. Membership leveled off in the 60s and 70s and then began to fall. Between the 50s and the 90s church attendance declined by about 1/3.
But Putnam's analysis goes deeper. It's not just that Americans are participating less in church and politics. Patterns of involvement are also changing.
For example, Putnam reviews many surveys that assess the various political activities that Americans might engage in. From the 60s to the late 90s political activities that employ the words "serve," "work," and "attend" have experienced the steepest declines. Solitary political activities have also declined but less so when compared to group activities. For example, the activity "working for a political party" declined by 42% from the 70s to the 90s. By contrast, "wrote a letter to the paper" declined by only 14%. The point here is that when Americans do participate in the political process they are tending to do this more and more often as individuals. We write letters, donate online, participate in political blogs, and put out a campaign sign in our front yard. That is, there may be a great deal of political activity in a person's life but much of that activity has been hollowed out, socially speaking.
Similar trends are seen in American churches. We've noted the declines in church attendance, but church members are also participating less and less in church social activities (e.g., attending bible class, being involved in church ministries). That is, although formal church membership has declined only about 10% over the last few decades the decline in participating in church ministries and groups has been very steep, a decline around 25%-30%. Again, it's a process of hollowing out. Church attendance and membership are issues of individual participation. But what is most rapidly declining in American churches is the degree of social engagement. This trend is exacerbated by the rise of church "surfing" and "shopping" where people drift from church to church. In sum, although Americans might be just as religious as they have been in the past, they are slowly withdrawing from church life. Americans might believe in God but they don't belong anywhere, religiously speaking. Faith has become a solo activity.
I'm guessing none of this is news to you. These trends have been well documented in the media. Also, just ask your children's minister if it is becoming harder and harder to find people to volunteer to teach Sunday School classes.
My point in talking about these trends isn't to sing a sad song of lament. Mainly I'm just trying to illustrate how alone we are. Americans are disengaged informally (less entertaining in the home, fewer bowling leagues), civically (less engagement in local politics) and religiously (less church participation). Across the board we are "bowling alone" more and more often.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does this say to us as God's people?
In recent discussions in our congregation, we asked how we can encourage more involvement. This article does not give answers, but does suggest that our problem is not unique. Somehow, we need to help the congregation see that we are a congregation of God’s people, that our service to God is not so individualistic that we operate alone. Yes, we must have an individual relationship to God – but this relationship is one of family and is shared by all who are part of God’s congregation. It is churches that foster the greatest sense of family that are growing, or at least that is my impression.
Alone, Suburban & Sorted: Part 2, Church and Politics
In Part 1 of Alone, Suburban & Sorted we noted that Americans are entertaining less and less in their own homes. In addition, Americans are withdrawing from informal recreational and social activities in their communities (e.g., bowling leagues). In this post we return to Bowling Alone to talk about trends affecting more formal social affiliations: Church and politics.
The big point I want to highlight from Putnam's analysis is the "hollowing out" of political and religious life. On the surface one can measure religious and political participation by watching the simplest of barometers, voting and church attendance. Both of those numbers have been declining. Since the 1960s, voter turnout has been steadily dropping. Zeroing in, this decline has been the steepest for local elections, primaries, and non-presidential election cycles. That is, interest in local politics--the politics of my town, schools and neighborhood--has seen the steepest declines in voter engagement. Again, this is a sign of social impoverishment at the neighborhood level.
Moving from voting to church attendance we see a similar decline in participation. From the 1930s to the 1960s church membership was rising. Membership leveled off in the 60s and 70s and then began to fall. Between the 50s and the 90s church attendance declined by about 1/3.
But Putnam's analysis goes deeper. It's not just that Americans are participating less in church and politics. Patterns of involvement are also changing.
For example, Putnam reviews many surveys that assess the various political activities that Americans might engage in. From the 60s to the late 90s political activities that employ the words "serve," "work," and "attend" have experienced the steepest declines. Solitary political activities have also declined but less so when compared to group activities. For example, the activity "working for a political party" declined by 42% from the 70s to the 90s. By contrast, "wrote a letter to the paper" declined by only 14%. The point here is that when Americans do participate in the political process they are tending to do this more and more often as individuals. We write letters, donate online, participate in political blogs, and put out a campaign sign in our front yard. That is, there may be a great deal of political activity in a person's life but much of that activity has been hollowed out, socially speaking.
Similar trends are seen in American churches. We've noted the declines in church attendance, but church members are also participating less and less in church social activities (e.g., attending bible class, being involved in church ministries). That is, although formal church membership has declined only about 10% over the last few decades the decline in participating in church ministries and groups has been very steep, a decline around 25%-30%. Again, it's a process of hollowing out. Church attendance and membership are issues of individual participation. But what is most rapidly declining in American churches is the degree of social engagement. This trend is exacerbated by the rise of church "surfing" and "shopping" where people drift from church to church. In sum, although Americans might be just as religious as they have been in the past, they are slowly withdrawing from church life. Americans might believe in God but they don't belong anywhere, religiously speaking. Faith has become a solo activity.
I'm guessing none of this is news to you. These trends have been well documented in the media. Also, just ask your children's minister if it is becoming harder and harder to find people to volunteer to teach Sunday School classes.
My point in talking about these trends isn't to sing a sad song of lament. Mainly I'm just trying to illustrate how alone we are. Americans are disengaged informally (less entertaining in the home, fewer bowling leagues), civically (less engagement in local politics) and religiously (less church participation). Across the board we are "bowling alone" more and more often.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does this say to us as God's people?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
YOU COULD HAVE HEARD A PIN DROP
A friend sent me the following. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do, and that it will help you to understand more about our place in the world as the United States of America. We are certainly not perfect - but I believe the following four anecdotes illustrate what this country is really about.... Jerry.
(1) When in England, at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush.
He answered, 'Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return.'
You could have heard a pin drop.
(2) There was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French
and American. During a break, one of the French engineers came back into the room saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does he intended to do, bomb them?'
A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly: 'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several
hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they
have three cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day, they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in
transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck. We have eleven such ships; how many does
France have?'
You could have heard a pin drop.
(3) A U.S. Navy Admiral was attending a naval conference that included Admirals from the U.S., English, Canadian,
Australian and French Navies. At a cocktail reception, he found himself standing with a large group of Officers
that included personnel from most of those countries.
Everyone was chatting away in English as they sipped their drinks but a French admiral suddenly complained that, whereas Europeans learn many languages, Americans learn only English.' He then asked, 'Why is it that we always have to speak English in these conferences rather than speaking French?'
Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied 'Maybe it's because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you wouldn't have to speak German.'
You could have heard a pin drop.
(4) Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in Paris by plane. At French Customs, he took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry on.
'You have been to France before, monsieur?' the customs officer asked sarcastically.
Mr. Whiting admitted that he had been to France previously
Then you should know enough to have your passport ready.'
The American said, ''The last time I was here, I didn't have to show it.
'Impossible. Americans always have to show your passports on arrival in France !'
The American senior gave the Frenchman a long hard look. Then he quietly explained, ''Well, when I came ashore at Omaha Beach on D-Day in 1944 to help liberate this country, I couldn't find a single Frenchmen to show a passport to.'
You could have heard a pin drop.
(1) When in England, at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush.
He answered, 'Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return.'
You could have heard a pin drop.
(2) There was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French
and American. During a break, one of the French engineers came back into the room saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does he intended to do, bomb them?'
A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly: 'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several
hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they
have three cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day, they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in
transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck. We have eleven such ships; how many does
France have?'
You could have heard a pin drop.
(3) A U.S. Navy Admiral was attending a naval conference that included Admirals from the U.S., English, Canadian,
Australian and French Navies. At a cocktail reception, he found himself standing with a large group of Officers
that included personnel from most of those countries.
Everyone was chatting away in English as they sipped their drinks but a French admiral suddenly complained that, whereas Europeans learn many languages, Americans learn only English.' He then asked, 'Why is it that we always have to speak English in these conferences rather than speaking French?'
Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied 'Maybe it's because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you wouldn't have to speak German.'
You could have heard a pin drop.
(4) Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in Paris by plane. At French Customs, he took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry on.
'You have been to France before, monsieur?' the customs officer asked sarcastically.
Mr. Whiting admitted that he had been to France previously
Then you should know enough to have your passport ready.'
The American said, ''The last time I was here, I didn't have to show it.
'Impossible. Americans always have to show your passports on arrival in France !'
The American senior gave the Frenchman a long hard look. Then he quietly explained, ''Well, when I came ashore at Omaha Beach on D-Day in 1944 to help liberate this country, I couldn't find a single Frenchmen to show a passport to.'
You could have heard a pin drop.
Friday, February 6, 2009
CROSSING THE GENERATION GAP
A friend sent me the following story. I had heard it many years ago - and loved it then. I still love it. Perhaps you will as well.
His name is Bill. He has wild hair, wears a T-shirt with holes in it, jeans, and no shoes. This was literally his wardrobe for his entire four years of college.
He is brilliant, profound, and very bright. He became a Christian while in college.
Across the street from the campus is a well-dressed, very conservative church. They want to develop a ministry to the students but have no idea how to go about it.
One day Bill decides to go there. He walks in with no shoes, jeans, his t-shirt, and wild hair. The service has begun, so Bill goes down the aisle seeking a seat.
The church is packed and he can't find a pew. Bill gets closer and closer to the pulpit. When he realizes there are no seats, he just sits down on the carpet.
About this time, the minister realizes that from way at the back of the church, an elder is slowly making his way toward Bill.
The elder is in his eighties, has silver-gray hair, and a three-piece suit. A godly man, very elegant, very dignified, very courtly. He walks with a cane, and as he starts walking toward this boy everyone is saying to themselves that you can't blame him for what he's going to do.
How can you expect a man of his age and of his background to understand some college kid on the floor?
The church is utterly silent. All eyes are focused on him. You can't hear anyone breathing. The minister can't even preach the sermon until the elder does what he will do.
Then they see this elderly man drop his cane on the floor. With difficulty, he lowers himself, sits next to Bill, and worships with him.
Everyone chokes up with emotion.
When the minister gains control, he says, 'What I'm about to preach, you will never remember. What you have just seen, you will never forget.'
[Read this, and then read James 2:1-9. - Jerry.]
His name is Bill. He has wild hair, wears a T-shirt with holes in it, jeans, and no shoes. This was literally his wardrobe for his entire four years of college.
He is brilliant, profound, and very bright. He became a Christian while in college.
Across the street from the campus is a well-dressed, very conservative church. They want to develop a ministry to the students but have no idea how to go about it.
One day Bill decides to go there. He walks in with no shoes, jeans, his t-shirt, and wild hair. The service has begun, so Bill goes down the aisle seeking a seat.
The church is packed and he can't find a pew. Bill gets closer and closer to the pulpit. When he realizes there are no seats, he just sits down on the carpet.
About this time, the minister realizes that from way at the back of the church, an elder is slowly making his way toward Bill.
The elder is in his eighties, has silver-gray hair, and a three-piece suit. A godly man, very elegant, very dignified, very courtly. He walks with a cane, and as he starts walking toward this boy everyone is saying to themselves that you can't blame him for what he's going to do.
How can you expect a man of his age and of his background to understand some college kid on the floor?
The church is utterly silent. All eyes are focused on him. You can't hear anyone breathing. The minister can't even preach the sermon until the elder does what he will do.
Then they see this elderly man drop his cane on the floor. With difficulty, he lowers himself, sits next to Bill, and worships with him.
Everyone chokes up with emotion.
When the minister gains control, he says, 'What I'm about to preach, you will never remember. What you have just seen, you will never forget.'
[Read this, and then read James 2:1-9. - Jerry.]
Thursday, February 5, 2009
BASIS FOR UNITY
Not long ago, I received the following question.
Christ is distinct from the Father, but He is also God (John 1:1) Christ is called God in Hebrews 1:8 and John 20:28. Matthew 28:19 associates the Persons of the Trinity under one name and there are also Old Testament references (Deuteronomy 6:4). In Psalm 2 the Messiah and God the Father are differentiated but both divine, as are the spirit and the Father in Isaiah 48:16. Can you please tell me more about the Godhead? I do believe that there is one True God in His threefold personality.
To this, I gave the following answer:
Thank you for your question.
The relationship that exists within the Deity (Godhead) is truly one of the great mysteries - but how could it be otherwise? To explain it, one would have to be God, as would any who would understand the explanation. Yet, there are many things we can know about this relationship.
One thing we know about God is that "God is love" (1 John 4:8). Certainly this is not all that God is, but love is basic and fundamental to His nature. This is true so much that John says in this verse, "Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love."
Now, one of the things about love is that it must have an object. Can you imagine love that has no object to love? As humans, we learn to love by being loved. God, who is love and who is also eternal (that is, He has always existed), did not "learn" to love - but being Trinity, He always existed in community where there is relationship. The basic fact of that relationship is love.
In this, we can think of the Godhead as Family. But this is not like our imperfect human families where tensions and (sometimes) even hatred mars family love. This is Family where perfect love exists eternally. This Family is one and this Family is perfect love.
The beauty of perfect love is that it seeks other objects to love. This can be seen in a human family when a husband and wife who, as an expression of their love for each other, want a child to love as well. With the Divine Family, this led to Creation. "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness.... So God created man in in own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them" (Genesis 1:26-27). God not only created creatures whom He could love; He also created creatures who had the capacity for loving each other. "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good."
That is, it was good until sin came into the world. How did sin come? It came when the serpent convinced Mother Eve that God did not truly love her as much as He claimed, that God was holding out on her by forbidding her the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The mistrust that entered the world by that sin quickly spread. When Adam was confronted by God with having disobeyed, what did he do? He immediately blamed God and the woman! "The woman you put here with me - she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it" (Genesis 3:12). Not only was there a rupture in Adam's love for God by that mistrust, but there was also a rupture in Adam's love for his wife!
It was to restore love in the world that Jesus came. It was God's love that sent Him (John 3:16). He said that the greatest commandment is to love God; the second is to love your neighbor as you love yourself (Matthew 22:34-40). Later He "raised the bar" on the love we are to have for others: "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another" (John 13:34). This love was to be the sign of His disciples. Just how great that love is is seen two chapters later: "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love" (John 15:9).
Does this explain the relationship among the Godhead? Does it remove the mystery? No, it does neither of these. Yet it does point us in the right direction, a direction that is frequently lost in the theological niceties of human minds attempting to explain how there can be one God when there is a plurality of persons.
The Godhead wants us to share in the love that is in heaven. This is a sharing that begins even now, but will exist in a fuller perfection when we go up into glory. The apostle of love declared, "We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ" (1 John 1:3). Later in that same epistle he wrote:
How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! .... Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure. (1 John 3:1-3)
Even now, we are already privileged to be in the Family of God, but John says we will not know how great this will ultimately be until that great day when we see Him as He is - and finally realize fully the purpose for which He created us, to be in His image and His likeness.
To the above answer, I would like to add the following:
What does all of this have to do with unity?
Simply that love is the glue that holds us together - and the love that is in the church (congregation, brotherhood) is to be of the same quality as the love that exists in the godhead.
I always thought that loving one another as Jesus loves us is a high "bar" as a standard for our love. Yet, when Jesus told us He loves us as the Father loves Him, my previous concept was blown away.
Now, consider the progression:
Christ is distinct from the Father, but He is also God (John 1:1) Christ is called God in Hebrews 1:8 and John 20:28. Matthew 28:19 associates the Persons of the Trinity under one name and there are also Old Testament references (Deuteronomy 6:4). In Psalm 2 the Messiah and God the Father are differentiated but both divine, as are the spirit and the Father in Isaiah 48:16. Can you please tell me more about the Godhead? I do believe that there is one True God in His threefold personality.
To this, I gave the following answer:
Thank you for your question.
The relationship that exists within the Deity (Godhead) is truly one of the great mysteries - but how could it be otherwise? To explain it, one would have to be God, as would any who would understand the explanation. Yet, there are many things we can know about this relationship.
One thing we know about God is that "God is love" (1 John 4:8). Certainly this is not all that God is, but love is basic and fundamental to His nature. This is true so much that John says in this verse, "Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love."
Now, one of the things about love is that it must have an object. Can you imagine love that has no object to love? As humans, we learn to love by being loved. God, who is love and who is also eternal (that is, He has always existed), did not "learn" to love - but being Trinity, He always existed in community where there is relationship. The basic fact of that relationship is love.
In this, we can think of the Godhead as Family. But this is not like our imperfect human families where tensions and (sometimes) even hatred mars family love. This is Family where perfect love exists eternally. This Family is one and this Family is perfect love.
The beauty of perfect love is that it seeks other objects to love. This can be seen in a human family when a husband and wife who, as an expression of their love for each other, want a child to love as well. With the Divine Family, this led to Creation. "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness.... So God created man in in own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them" (Genesis 1:26-27). God not only created creatures whom He could love; He also created creatures who had the capacity for loving each other. "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good."
That is, it was good until sin came into the world. How did sin come? It came when the serpent convinced Mother Eve that God did not truly love her as much as He claimed, that God was holding out on her by forbidding her the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The mistrust that entered the world by that sin quickly spread. When Adam was confronted by God with having disobeyed, what did he do? He immediately blamed God and the woman! "The woman you put here with me - she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it" (Genesis 3:12). Not only was there a rupture in Adam's love for God by that mistrust, but there was also a rupture in Adam's love for his wife!
It was to restore love in the world that Jesus came. It was God's love that sent Him (John 3:16). He said that the greatest commandment is to love God; the second is to love your neighbor as you love yourself (Matthew 22:34-40). Later He "raised the bar" on the love we are to have for others: "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another" (John 13:34). This love was to be the sign of His disciples. Just how great that love is is seen two chapters later: "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love" (John 15:9).
Does this explain the relationship among the Godhead? Does it remove the mystery? No, it does neither of these. Yet it does point us in the right direction, a direction that is frequently lost in the theological niceties of human minds attempting to explain how there can be one God when there is a plurality of persons.
The Godhead wants us to share in the love that is in heaven. This is a sharing that begins even now, but will exist in a fuller perfection when we go up into glory. The apostle of love declared, "We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ" (1 John 1:3). Later in that same epistle he wrote:
How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! .... Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure. (1 John 3:1-3)
Even now, we are already privileged to be in the Family of God, but John says we will not know how great this will ultimately be until that great day when we see Him as He is - and finally realize fully the purpose for which He created us, to be in His image and His likeness.
To the above answer, I would like to add the following:
What does all of this have to do with unity?
Simply that love is the glue that holds us together - and the love that is in the church (congregation, brotherhood) is to be of the same quality as the love that exists in the godhead.
I always thought that loving one another as Jesus loves us is a high "bar" as a standard for our love. Yet, when Jesus told us He loves us as the Father loves Him, my previous concept was blown away.
Now, consider the progression:
- I love you as the Father loves me.
- You love one another as I love you.
- We are to love one another as the Father loves Jesus.
How do I love you? Certainly not as much as the Father loves the Son - but is it even the same quality of love? It is certainly not as constant as the heavenly love, but does it make real differences in how I treat you?
When I look at members of my congregation or brotherhood as objects of God's love - and therefore, as objects of my love, I will begin to love as I ought. As long as I regard them as competitors instead of my lovers, there will be tensions among us (potential or real).
Until the congregation begins to develop interactive love such as the Godhead has always had, unity will be a Chimera. When we base our unity on perfection of agreement of understanding of the Word of God, we will never have unity. It is when we allow God's love to be poured into our hearts by God's Spirit that we will find the unity of the Spirit. Then, in that love, we will find it easy to maintain that unity because it will be unity in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Friday, January 16, 2009
I read a posting by an acquaintance of mine, Danny Dodd. He is beautiful man who has come through some gut-wrenching emotional trials, but has his life all together now. He has some great insights on what makes life really "work," which he shares on his blog, The New Adventures of An Old Preacher (http://dannydodd.wordpress.com/). The following is a recent entry.
I am All Sexed Out
January 13, 2009 at 9:27 pm
January 13, 2009 at 9:27 pm
I confess. I am all sexed out. I have had enough. Just TMI.
I am weary of the loud tabloid screams trumpeting what celebrity just came out of the closet or which starlet will pose nude or release a sex tape or who is sleeping with who in Hollywood.
I am sickened by the seemingly monthly teacher-sleeping-with-the-middle-school-kid headline.
I have had enough of the cheerleader-sending-nude-photos-on-the-cell-phone stories.
I never want to see or hear another word about how prostitution helps marriages, is a noble and needed service profession and should be legalized.
And I am tired of the overt sexual intrusion into practically every form of entertainment.
My heart breaks to see more and more- especially Christian folk- gravitate towards this skewed and hollow vision (represented by all of the above) of what our sexual nature is all about.
Satan has succeeded in seducing us. He has aggressively taken God’s beautiful wedding gift of sexual intimacy and re-branded it. He has turned it gutter ugly. His approach is animalistic- substituting lust for love. Sex has become just another bodily function to be fulfilled- another itch to scratch with little more thought put into it than that.
Multiple sex partners- sure. Same-sex partners- of course. Shame- for what? Abstinence- not possible. Intimacy- not really attainable. Monogamy- are you kidding!
Satan’s message is loud, clear and is winning our day. Sex rules and has no rules.
But I am oh-so tired of hearing all these loud voices promoting it!
Where are the other voices? Is it just me or does anyone else see a connection between our sexed-up culture and broken homes, broken lives, and broken people?
God did not give us the gift of sex for us to unwrap and throw in the trash. It is worth much more than that. It is a gift to keep and savor- to only be unwrapped and shared in the celebration of marital love and intimacy. It is only here where we can actually realize just how precious this gift really is.
One man for one woman for life may sound like something from another planet these days, but I will take it any day over the gutter garbage sexual perversion Satan celebrates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
