Faith

Categories Book Notes, Theology

Self in light of the cross

1 Comment by

I’m three chapters from the end of The Cross of Christ–and I’m going to get it finished! Not that the book isn’t engaging. In fact, I’ve already finished reading the book–and have my notes all on paper. It’s just getting them on the computer that’s the problem. That and trying to figure out when to post them without loading you down with too many “thinking” posts. But I want to get them done by next Wednesday–so here goes!

Notes on John Stott’s
The Cross of Christ
Chapter 11: Self-Understanding and Self-Giving

The ways worldly people look at themselves can easily be divided into two broad categories: self-love or self-loathing.

The cross leaves room for neither.

Rather, the cross calls believers to a life of self-affirmation and self-denial.

It’s strange, isn’t it, to put those two together?

The world’s attitudes, self-love and self-hatred, are mutually exclusive–but they are both rooted in pride. The cross’s attitudes, self-affirmation and self-denial–despite their apparent contradiction–are complementary. Both of these are rooted in humility.

The cross’s self-affirmation is different than the world’s self-love. While the world encourages unconditional acceptance of self (both the good and the bad) as “self-esteem”, the cross affirms both the fallenness of self and its worth to God. The cross says that I have value, not because I am particularly special, but because God has valued me.

“As William Temple expressed it, ‘My worth is what I am worth to God; and that is a marvelous great deal, for Christ died for me.'”
~Quoted in John Stott’s The Cross of Christ

The cross’s self-denial is also different from the world’s self-hatred. While the world loathes itself and engages in self-destructive behaviors, the cross calls us to recognize and identify with Christ–and to “reckon [ourselves] dead to sin” (Romans 6:11).

The world’s view of self leads to self-centeredness. Either one idolizes self, placing self as lord and following its every whim, or one villifies self, making self the enemy and focusing energy on self-destruction.

The cross’s view of self, on the other hand, leads to others-centeredness. One’s self is affirmed–but not in such a way as to inspire self-worship. One’s self is denied–but not with self as its object. Rather, the affirmation of self leads to worship–and the denial of self to service.

It is in the cross that we lose our lives in order to gain them (Luke 17:33).

I love how C.S. Lewis describes the effect of right relationship with God on “self”:

“The more we get what we now call ‘ourselves’ out of the way and let Him take us over, the more truly ourselves we become….It is no good trying to ‘be myself’ without Him. The more I resist Him and try to live on my own, the more I become dominated by my own heredity and upbringing and surroundings and natural desires…It is when I turn to Christ, when I give myself up to His personality, that I first begin to have a real personality of my own….Give up yourself, and you will find your real self. Lose your life and you will save it. Nothing in you that has not died will ever be raised from the dead. Look for yourself, and you will find in the long run only hatred, loneliness, despair, rage, ruin, and decay. But look to Christ and you will find Him, and with Him everything else thrown in.”
~C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

(See more of my notes on The Cross of Christ.)

Categories Book Notes, Faith

Bad news masquerading as good

4 Comments by

After making a flippant but completely uninformed remark about Joel Osteen (with whom I had no familiarity except a short video clip), I was convicted that I ought not criticize things/people I know nothing about. After all, one of the charges against the false prophets in Second Peter is that they “speak evil of the things they do not understand”.

I rescinded my flippant remark and said I would look into Osteen more before making an evaluation. Thus, I traveled to my local library and picked up one of Osteen’s books–Become a Better You.

What I found shocked me and troubled me deeply. In some ways, Osteen is just another prosperity preacher of the Word of Faith tradition. He confuses the promises of the gospel with the idea of self-fulfillment and turns God into a vending-machine in the sky. The so-called prosperity gospel is a disturbing corruption of the true gospel–but I’ve known many who ascribe to a version of the prosperity gospel who still maintain at least a degree of faithfulness to the true gospel: that Jesus Christ died to pay the penalty for sins, on our behalf, thus reconciling us to God.

I see no evidence that Osteen has maintained any modicum of the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

Instead, Osteen has replaced the gospel with an “I’m good, you’re good, we’re all good” self-esteem talk. He tells his readers that “God has already put in the talent, the creativity, the discipline, the wisdom, and the determination. It’s all in you.” “We have to believe that we have what it takes.” Over and over, he states that “God has placed the seeds of greatness inside of you”. He emphasizes the goodness of creation–but completely ignores the fall.

I almost thought he was going to address the fall when he refers to Adam and Eve hiding after eating the forbidden fruit. “Great,” I thought, “Now he’s going to tell them that the created goodness has been warped and twisted by sin, but that Jesus died to redeem us from that twistedness, to reverse sin.” Alas, it was not to be. Instead, Osteen uses God’s response to Adam and Eve (“Who told you that you were naked?”) as “proof” that they weren’t actually naked, that they were believing a lie from the enemy. Except that wasn’t a lie. They were naked. They had something to be ashamed of. They had something to hide. It wasn’t a lie. It was the truth.

Now, this might sound like a huge downer. Osteen’s got good news, I’m bearing bad. But am I?

You see, Osteen’s message of self-esteem and “you’re all good” is a cheap substitute for the truly good news. The good news is that while we were completely worthless, God endued us with worth by sending His Son to die for us. While we were incapable of helping ourselves, Jesus Christ made us new. The good news is that while we were yet dead in our sins, Christ died for us.

Osteen’s message skips the fall–and thus sees no need for the cross. In the first seventy pages of Become a Better You, Osteen mentions the cross exactly never–unless one considers this gem on page 35: “God gave His very best for you, His only Son.”

In ignoring the fall and the cross, Osteen leaves out the essence of Christianity. As Charles Spurgeon points out (HT: Justin Taylor):

“Yes, it is Christ, Christ, Christ whom we have to preach; and if we leave Him out, we leave out the very soul of the gospel.”

“You do not really preach the gospel if you leave Christ out; if He be omitted, it is not the gospel. You may invite men to listen to your message, but you are only inviting them to gaze upon an empty table unless Christ is the very center and substance of all that you set before them.”

Want to become a better you? Osteen can’t help–he can only try to convince you that you’re actually not that bad. Only in Jesus Christ can bad become good and sinners saints. Denying sin will not make it go away, it will only lead us into delusion. Only by recognizing our sin and by faith receiving Christ’s work on the cross can we be made righteous.

The gospel that Osteen shares is not good news at all–it is bad news masquerading as good.

Categories Following Christ

Heretic Hunting

Leave a comment by

I try to diligently evaluate what I hear or read in light of God’s word. I desire to speak the truth in love, bringing correction when needed. Often, I am very bold when writing (as on this blog), and very timid when directly addressing someone (either in person or via online means).

But there’s one thing that I’ve been very, VERY wary of. I’ve been very uncomfortable with using the term “heretic” or accusing someone of being a “false teacher.” Either of these terms bring to mind witch hunts, burning at the stake, and other such things–in which someone is condemned to torture or death as a result of their beliefs. I don’t like it. I don’t like those terms, or their connotations, at all.

Which is why when I was recently going through a Bible study on II Peter, I got rather uncomfortable. In chapter 2, Peter is all over false prophets and false teachers, likening them to brute beasts made to be hunted and killed, calling them acne on the face of the body of Christ and wells without water. It’s not a pretty picture. Peter speaks of the false teachers’ sins (covetousness, exploitation, deception, denying Christ, despising authority, walking in the flesh, presumption, willfullness, speaking evil of dignitaries, etc.) and of their impending punishment (swift destruction, the wages of unrighteousness, blackness of darkness forever).

I might be afraid of the term “false teacher”, but Peter certainly wasn’t. John recognized that false prophets have gone out into the world, and warned the church to test the spirits to see whether they were from God (I John 4:1-3). In 2 Corinthians 11:13, Paul condemns the false apostles who try to commend themselves to the Corinthian church. In Galatians 2:4, Paul speaks of the Judaizers as being “false brethren” who “came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage.”

False prophets, false teachers, false apostles exist. They seek to bring people into bondage to a gospel that is not the gospel at all (Galatians 1:6-9). They seek to deceive, if possible, even the elect (Mark 13:22). However, the Judge of the world is not slow–He has a judgment reserved for these false teachers, a horrible punishment.

Okay, so…false teachers exist. It says so in Scripture. False teachers aren’t just a myth made up by the superstitious, witch-hunting, unenlightened masses. They’re real. They’re dangerous.

And what on earth are Christians supposed to do about them?

Scripture gives us some direction as to how we are to deal with false teachers (thankfully, Scripture does not suggest that we burn them at the stake or otherwise torture them).

First, we are to recognize them. Romans 16:17 says to “note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned”. I John 4:1 tells us to test the spirits, and then gives us a litmus test by which we may know deceptive spirits from the Spirit of God:

“By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God.”
~I John 4:2-3

Thus, the primary means by which we can recognize a false teacher is a denial of the incarnation of Christ. Other mentions of false teachers and false “gospels” throughout the New Testament give additional characteristics of false teachers: they deny the centrality of the cross and insist upon good works (Galatians 1-2), they deny the Lord who bought them (2 Peter 2:1), they walk according to the flesh and despise authority (2 Peter 2:10), they promise liberty but actually enslave to lust (2 Peter 2:18-20).

The second thing believers are to do with false teachers is to avoid them. I Timothy 6:3-5 says that “If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness….from such withdraw yourself.” Romans 16:17 urges the believers to “avoid them.” II John 10-11 tells believers not to greet or receive into their house the one who teaches a doctrine contrary to the doctrine of Christ, lest they become participants in the false teacher’s sin.

Finally, we are to combat false teaching by speaking truth. This charge is particularly true for leaders within the church. Paul charges Titus in Titus 2:1 that he “speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine.” An elder is supposed to hold fast the faithful word he has been taught, so “that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.” (Titus 1:9). Timothy was to “charge some that they teach no other doctrine, nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith.” (I Timothy 1:3-4) All believers are called to “hold fast” to sound doctrine (Phil. 2:16, I Thess 5:21, II Thess 2:15, II Tim 1:13-14).

Interestingly, we are never called to pass judgment on false teachers or heretics. Instead, we know from Scripture that they are already under the judgment of God–but that God delays in sending His judgment because He is merciful and desirous that none should perish (2 Peter 3:5-9.) Our role is not to pass judgment on them, but to “beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked; but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” (2 Peter 2:17-18)

Categories Following Christ

Heresy Hunter: A Case Study, Part 2

2 Comments by

Yesterday, I set up a case study for the “heresy hunter” to think through. The “heresy hunter” has read The Shack and evaluated the view of God’s love found within (universalism). He has rejected this view of God’s love on the basis of Scripture. Now, a Christian friend of his is raving about how his view of God’s love has been changed dramatically by The Shack. I discussed the role of Scripture for correction, but since Scripture is clear about not judging, I closed with a question:

“How am I to correct without judging?”

I think humility is the key. I Timothy 2:24, above, says “in humility correcting those who are in opposition.” First, we must be aware of the limits of our own knowledge and understanding of the truth, as discussed in the first”heresy hunter” post. Second, we must be aware that we are not without sin or error. We are not without sin; we have no right to be casting stones.

This leads us to the second part of correction without judgment–that is, we should speak with love in order to edify. We are not called to judge or to cast stones to tear another down–we are called to correct in order to edify and build up. We must carefully consider both our motivation and our means in order to ascertain that what we are doing accomplishes edification.

Romans 14 speaks a great deal about this, encouraging more mature believers to accept the less mature ones and not to quibble about things that are unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

“Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things….Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way…Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another.”
~Romans 14:1, 13, 19

We should consider first the importance of the idea or teaching. Is this something that is central to the faith or is it a periphery issue? (I would say that the idea of universalism is a central issue and therefore should be addressed.) Then we should ask how we can address this in a way that does not put a stumbling block in our brother’s way. Finally, we should seek to address the issue in a way that leads to peace and edification.

There are probably a lot of different ways this can be done. Maybe it means just bringing up your own concern in the same conversation. “The Shack was an engaging book and a lot of people seem to like it a lot. I’m concerned, though, at how it conveys the idea that everyone can be saved–without talking about how Christ is the only way to salvation.” Maybe it means encouraging further study. “You mentioned a couple of days ago that you were impressed with how The Shack talks about God’s love. I was wondering if you’d like to do a Bible study with me to explore what God’s love looks like.” Maybe it means direct confrontation. “You said you liked how The Shack portrayed God’s love, but I’m concerned that it portrays a false view of God’s love. I’m afraid that the ‘nice guy’ idea of God’s love found in The Shack might blind you to the truth of God’s love as portrayed on the cross. Could we talk about this a bit more?”

I’m certainly not perfect in this respect. Sometimes I err on the side of not bringing truth (even when falsehood is very clearly leading a brother or sister into bondage). Other times I err on the side of being an unloving bringer of truth (abrasively speaking truth in a way that tears down rather than building up.) But my heart’s desire is that somehow I could learn to walk this line: truth in love, truth in love.

Categories Following Christ

Heresy Hunter: A Case Study, Part 1

Leave a comment by

Last week, I talked about the heresy hunter and made a case for evaluating information on the basis of truth–but doing it with a humble heart, recognizing the finiteness of our human knowledge compared to God’s infinite wisdom.

I think a lot of people would be with me on this one. They agree that there is an objective standard of truth and that we should evaluate information based on truth. Few people have a problem with me personally evaluating what I hear and deciding to either accept or reject it on the basis of some objective standard of truth.

But what if I tell someone else that what they’ve heard or are believing is false?

What if I say that the concept of God’s love that they obtained from reading The Shack is false? The Shack espouses universalism, the idea that God’s love means that all people will be saved. This concept is clearly unscriptural, as it denies the necessity of Christ as a mediator of the New Covenant (In John 14:6 Jesus states that “No one comes to the Father except through Me.”), the wrath of God towards sin and sinners (Romans 2:5-9 states that those who obey unrighteousness are “treasuring up for yourself wrath”), and the existence of eternal damnation (Hebrews 6:2 places eternal judgment among the foundational principles of the faith).

I know of many people who say they were “touched” by The Shack. Others came away from reading The Shack with a “different view of God.” Perhaps they were touched, perhaps they did come away with a different view of God. And truly, The Shack presents a different view of God than that presented in the Bible. But the view The Shack presents of God is patently false.

Here, a lot more people are inclined to label me as judgmental. How dare you say that this isn’t true! It feels true to me. How dare you say otherwise! Are you saying that my feelings don’t matter?

I’m not saying that your feelings don’t matter. But regardless of your feelings, truth is truth. Your feelings are not a measure of truth. Scripture is a measure of truth. So even if you “feel good” about the view of God presented in The Shack, that view is still wrong.

This is where things start getting difficult for me. What should I do when someone says something that is unbiblical? What should I do when I recognize that someone else holds a false belief about God or about truth or whatever? How should I respond?

I’ve evaluated that teaching or belief and determined that it’s unbiblical. But how do I go about pointing that out to another person? Should I point that out to the other person?

II Timothy 3:16 states that Scripture is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” One of the roles of Scripture is to reprove and correct. And Scripture talks of the role that believers play in correcting their fellow believers:

“Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.”
~James 5:19-20

“And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.”
~II Timothy 2:24-26

The correction of other believers is one means God uses to work repentance, rescue, and salvation.

Okay, but how am I to deal with the rest of Scripture, which makes clear that I am not to judge? How am I to correct without judging?

Check back tomorrow to hear my conclusions to this case study, including cautions for the “corrector” and suggestions for different ways a “corrector” might approach this particular case.

Categories Following Christ

Heresy Hunter

1 Comment by

Yesterday, I discussed the issue of the stereotypical “Critical Calvinist”. In the article I cited, a number of commentors stated that Calvinists were quick to label something heresy. Their most common accusation was that all Arminians are actually semi-Pelagian. (I’ll admit that I’ve occasionally been wont to note the dangerous tendency of Arminian thought towards semipelagianism.) At any rate, the critical Calvinists are also derided as heresy hunters, judgmental, always trying to figure out what’s right and wrong about everything.

I can see how people get that idea. After all, Reformed thought is very interested in truth. I personally am very interested in truth. I believe that there is truth and there is falsehood–and that believers should critically evaluate information in light of truth as it is revealed in God’s word. I believe that there is a right way and a wrong way to read the Bible. I believe that we should read the Bible with the aim of discovering what God intended in Scripture rather than finding what “I get out of it.”

This insistence on truth being truth and not open to individual interpretation already opens me up to charges of judgmentalism from some.

Yet, I don’t think Scripture would agree. 2 Peter 1:20-21 speaks of Scripture saying: “…no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”

So the conclusion that objective truth does indeed exist is supported by Scripture.

But I am not just interested in the premise that objective truth does exist–I am interested in knowing what that objective truth IS. I want to know and live by truth–and I want to evaluate and reject falsehood.

When I hear that a student has been told by a speaker that he/she needs to “work to be chosen by God”, I bristle.

This piece of information, this idea is clearly unbiblical. In Deuteronomy 7:6-8, God warns the Israelites against thinking that they have been chosen by any merit of their own: “The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the LORD loves you…” Romans 9:10-13 speaks of Jacob and Esau and how God chose one over the other: “…for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls…” Jacob was not chosen because he worked for God’s choosing–he was chosen because God, in His divine sovereignty chose to choose him.

In the same way, none of us merit salvation (or any of God’s gifts). We do not receive favor from God because we have worked for it. We receive favor from God because He has sovereignly bestowed it. We don’t work to be chosen. We are chosen. Period. God chooses, we’re chosen (by no act of our own).

Truth. Falsehood. I have evaluated this information in light of truth and have rejected it. I have passed judgment on it.

Scripture is in favor of is sort of evaluation and judgment of what others say. The Bereans were praised in Acts 17 for searching out the Scripture “to find out whether these things [that Paul and Silas taught] were so.” To evaluate ideas on the basis of Scripture is a good thing.

On the other hand, I Corinthians 8:1-2 warns “Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. And if anyone things that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know.”

The problem with the “Critical Calvinist” and the “Heresy Hunter” isn’t that he evaluates information critically based on the Word of God–it’s that he becomes puffed up with pride and uses his knowledge to tear down the body rather than building it up.

Some might read I Corinthians 8 and suggest that knowledge is a bad thing. “We need childlike faith,” they might say. “Why bother with all this thinking stuff?” Much of the church has unfortunately grabbed hold of this idea and embraced anti-intellectualism.

But I don’t think that when Paul said that knowledge puffs up, he was arguing for anti-intellectualism. Instead, he was arguing for more love and humility.

Knowledge, by itself, makes one think much of himself–and little of those around him who have less knowledge. But, as Paul points out, anybody who thinks he knows something shows that he really doesn’t know much–after all, compared to the vastness of God’s knowledge, our greatest knowledge is but the smallest subset of His infinite wisdom.

So keep thinking, Christians (or start thinking if you haven’t been already)–but consider all the while the smallness of your knowledge compared to the greatness of God’s, lest you become a puffed-up heresy hunter.

Categories Book Notes, Theology

Community of the Cross

Leave a comment by

Notes on John Stott’s
The Cross of Christ
Chapter 10: The Community of Celebration

In our discussion of the cross thus far, Stott says, we might be tempted to consider the cross to have only individual and/or cosmic effects.

This is not true.

Christ did not die merely to save individuals but to secure for Himself a people.

“…who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works. ”
~Titus 2:14

Nowhere is this communal aspect of the cross better seen or understood than in the one sacramental celebration that Christ Himself instituted: The Lord’s Supper.

In the Lord’s Supper, we remember Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

“and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, ‘Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.'”
~I Corinthians 11:24

In the Lord’s Supper, we partake of the benefits of Christ’s death on the cross.

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?”
~1 Corinthians 10:16

In the Lord’s Supper, we proclaim Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

“For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.”
~I Corinthians 11:26

In the Lord’s Supper, we are unified by Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

“For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.”
~I Corinthians 10:17

Finally, in the Lord’s Supper, we give thanks for Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

“Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name.”
~Hebrews 13:5

Conclusion:

“The Christian community is a community of the cross, for it has been brought into being by the cross, and the focus of its worship is the Lam once slain, now glorified. So the community of the cross is a community of celebration, a eucharistic community, ceaselessly offering to God through Christ the sacrifice of our praise and thanksgiving. The Christian life is an unending festival. And the festival we keep, now that our Passover Lamb has been sacrificed for us, is a joyful celebration of his sacrifice, together with a spiritual feasting upon it.”
~John Stott, The Cross of Christ

(See more of my notes on The Cross of Christ.)

Categories Following Christ

A Critical Calvinist

Leave a comment by

I find myself growing more theologically “Reformed” day by day. Some might call it Calvinist. I’m choosing to call myself “Reformed” because the cultural connotations of that term tend to be more holistic than those associated with the word “Calvinist”–and I’d rather not be known merely as a believer in predestination. So I’m claiming the “Reformed” brand.

But I’m acutely aware of the perception many believers have of Reformed thinkers as being judgmental, supercilious, and argumentative.

One evangelical sent a letter to Scot McKnight, asking his advice on how to deal with what he termed “hypercalvinists”:

They always use the same language and have the same condescending attitude toward everyone else….The problem is that they just are relentless. Absolutely no discussion or compromise. I have had the life kicked out of me at my church this past year by some of these people.

More impressions of reformed individuals come up in the comments.

Eddie says:

To be ‘Reformed’ involves making strong judgements [sic] about the soundness…of everything from books, to Bible translations and on to people.

Tim Gombis states:

They’re not going to converse with you but they will try to rhetorically manipulate you into the position of a heretic so that they can dismiss you with a rhetorical blast.

Julie says:

My experience with all sorts of Calvinists…is that right theology is the cornerstone of what constitutes pure/true faith, exhorting Christians to hold “correct” doctrine is the important work of the committed believer, and conflict/debate over doctrine is the most energizing, enlivening source of relationship.

Again, Julie writes:

The culture of the reformed crowd takes great pleasure and pride in having precisely thought out theological positions that give them deep satisfaction ….They wish to “share” this perspective, but they do so from the point of view of being right-er than the rest….The culture encourages intellectualism and apologetics of the systematic theological kind.

I sympathize with these individuals who have been hurt and offended by people who termed themselves “Reformed”. And I certainly don’t want to be condescending, relentless, uncompromising, judgmental, manipulative, dismissive, or critical.

At the same time, even apart from my quickly reforming doctrine, I am the person described above:

  • I am interested in the theological and doctrinal soundness of books, Bible translations, and people.
  • I do think that “right theology” is central to true faith (since “right theology” means simply right views of God)
  • I do think that believers should exhort one another to hold to correct doctrine.
  • I do consider conflict and debate over doctrine to be an incredible energizing and enlivening source of relationship.
  • I do take a great deal of pleasure in having precisely thought out theological positions
  • I do want to “share” my theological positions with others.
  • I do have a great appreciation for intellectualism.

Even apart from my theology (which really doesn’t seem to enter the conversation at all), I am what many of these commentors hate: I am an ambiguity-disliking, truth-affirming, intellectually-focused, debate-loving person.

In many ways, these traits are simply a part of my personality. Even if I were not Reformed/Calvinist, I would still be these things. In fact, five years ago, prior to my gradual conversion to Reformed thought, I was all of these things. It wasn’t Reformed thought that made me this way–I was this way already.

Of course, my newly Reformed thinking gives me a bit of perspective about these aspects of my personality. Reformed thinking, after all, says that I am totally depraved–that every part of me, including the personality traits that God originally pronounced “good” in the garden, is completely twisted as a result of the fall. I am totally depraved–incapable of good.

Yet somehow by the grace of God, completely apart from any merit of my own (for I had none), God chose me. He called me according to His purpose, He foreknew me, He predestined me to be conformed to the image of His Son. Having chosen me, He is in the process of taking every depraved part of me, including my personality, and overhauling so that it reflects Christ.

I am a critical Calvinist, depraved.

I am a critical Calvinist, being conformed.

Please be patient, God’s still not finished with me.

But I trust God will conform me day by day into His image–not of a critical Calvinist, but a Christlike Christian.

Categories Education, Following Christ

A bizarre turn I’m unwilling to ascribe to fate

4 Comments by

At the close of the last semester, I had every reason to believe that I’d be offered another teaching assistantship for the fall semester. Two instructors had approached me saying that they would like to have me as a TA–but the word around the department was that another person, a professor, was also interested in having me TA for her.

I made my plans accordingly. I had enough money in my checking account to live on throughout the summer. I would spend the summer working on my thesis and then take the assistantship in the fall. Come December, if I had not already found a job, I had enough money in my savings account to last 4-6 months while I searched for a job. I considered it a comfortable margin.

And so I proceeded.

But when May passed and June passed and July started to pass me by without receiving an assistantship offer, I had to assume that I would not be offered an assistantship. I started searching for positions in the Lincoln and Omaha area (having promised my roommate I’d remain in Lincoln until December.)

Today, I received a phone call from a University number–nothing surprising for me since I’d applied for several positions at the University.

But the call was not from one of those positions. It was from the Nutrition Graduate Department’s Administrative Assistant.

“Hi, Rebekah,” she said. “I’m getting ready to process payroll for the fall and realized that I still hadn’t received an acceptance from you for your assistantship.”

“That’s interesting,” I replied. “I hadn’t heard that I received an assistantship.”

But I had received an assistantship–and she’d emailed me the offer May 7, the last day of classes for fall semester. When I hadn’t promptly returned my acceptance, she e-mailed me again.

I received neither e-mail.

This time, she forwarded me the letter and I received it just fine.

She explained that I should pay no attention to the deadline for acceptance. She’d process my payroll papers and I could mail or drop off my acceptance any time.

So I have a job through December. I have the whole time. The rumors were true and I’ll be working with the professor.

A bizarre turn?

Absolutely.

Fate or luck?

I’m not willing to say that.

I believe that God is sovereign over every event of my life–even over misdirected or otherwise lost e-mails.

Why were both of those e-mails lost?

Maybe God wanted me to learn trust. Maybe God intends me to have one of these jobs I’ve applied for and knew I wouldn’t have applied for them if I had been secure in the knowledge of the assistantship. Maybe I’ll never know God’s plan in this.

But one thing I know: God knew exactly the moment each of those e-mails entered the ether–and He had a perfect plan for when and how and why things would turn out the way they did.

Because my life does not rest on the caprices of fate, but in the hands of a sovereign, all-powerful, all-loving God.

Categories Following Christ

Don’t worry…

Leave a comment by

Therefore I say to you…

…do not worry about your weight or whether you will have appetite enough to sustain it.

…do not worry about your rent, whether you will have money enough to pay it.

…do not worry about a job, whether you will find gainful employment.

Life is more than food and shelter and work.

Consider the ravens, for they neither sow nor reap, which have neither storehouse nor barn; and God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds?

Can you by worrying add a single pound to your (dropping) weight? Can you by worrying refill your (emptying) bank account? Can you by worrying attain a job?

If worrying gains you nothing, why do you do it?

Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; and yet I say to you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. If then God so clothes the grass, which today is in the field and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will He clothe you, O you of little faith?

Don’t seek what you should do, what you should do, what you should do–nor have an anxious mind.

For all these things the nations of the world seek after, and your Father knows that you need these things. But seek the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added to you.

Don’t fear, Rebekah–God is pleased to give you the kingdom. So give away your time, your money, your talent, your possessions. Sew for yourself moneybags that will never tear or lose their treasure. Work for a heavenly treasure.

For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Adapted from Luke 12:22-34