A couple of weeks ago, Lynne and I got a letter in the mail from an attorney's office. The letter said that had defaulted on our house loan and owed an amount which was at about 75% more than what the house is worth. The attorney's office was demanding some resolution or they would take action. Our house loan has always been in good standing, so we were quite surprised at this, especially since we've never heard anything about any problem with our loan.
There was some relief to notice that even though the letter was addressed to our address, it was not addressed to our names. They were not names we recognized, and they weren't the names of the previous owners.
So I called the attorney and explained the situation. From the start, the woman helping me was suspicious of my claims that we are the owners of the property. She said that they've never had a situation like this, and she wasn't sure how to handle it. Then the told me that because the loan was in default, that the property would go up for public sale on August 6! She then consulted with a lawyer while I was on hold for about 20 minutes. When she returned, she said that the lawyer has never had to deal with a claim like this. They asked me to fax in some form of proof of my (apparently-suspicious) claim that we were in fact the owners of the property.
Then I called the attorney who helped us close on the property 4 1/2 years ago. He said that he would take care of it. Soon afterwards, he called me back and said that the address was off by one digit, and he could show that the names on the letter were the borrowers for this other address.
We're still waiting to confirm that the attorneys are off our backs and that they are not going to try to sell our property.
But the collage of emotions that I went through (confusion, insecurity, fear, frustration, a wee bit of anger, tension, relief) served as an interesting life lesson.
In effect, our house is owned by someone else. Of course, we want to say that our house is owned by God, and in very many ways, it is. But in another sense, our house is owned by Satan. Not in a demonic, possessed, evil-worshiping kind of way, but just in the sense that this collection of wood beams, electrical wiring, and carpet are elements of this world, and Satan is the prince of this world (John 16:11). These are not things that will be a part of Christ's Kingdom when He returns.
Furthermore, the "owner" of this material has defaulted on his loan. Satan owes an enormous debt to God - so large that not even the Chief of Demons has enough resource to repay it. Therefore, even though we're the ones who live at that address, when Satan's debt comes due, our house is going to be "sold" as partial payment for the debt. We are going to be evicted (to a bigger, better place called a mansion!) and Satan is going to debtors' prison.
Now, I reflect on my range of emotions again. Of all those emotions I felt, some of them were just about the situation and the hassle. But until we were sure that there was no real threat on our property, some of my emotions included a certain dread about losing the property. Not the hassle, mind you, but losing the thing itself - the object.
And yet, that's exactly what's going to happen when Jesus returns - we're going to "lose" this property because the name on the note has defaulted on his loan.
I learned through experiencing some of those emotions that I'm more tied to some things than I thought I was. I dreaded the prospect of not having a particular "something" when faced with the possibility that it could be rapidly taken away from me. I'm not wildly ecstatic about our particular house, but I'm really fond of having a house.
Everything you own will one day be "sold" out from under you because of a defaulted loan. It will be sold as part of gargantuan effort to repay a debt that cannot be paid. Keep your stuff with this knowledge. Use this knowledge to rid yourself of stuff that's merely cluttering your life. Understand this every time you're attracted to the glitter of something knew. See a letter in your mind's eye that has your address on it, informing you that the loan on your property has defaulted. Find your joy, satisfaction, and significance in the things that will survive the final public auction of Satan's things.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Friday, June 27, 2008
Showing That God Exists Without Using the Bible
The Youth have been studying the book of Acts on Wednesday nights, seeing over and over again how much believers can accomplish when they just have confidence that God's Word is true and that the Holy Spirit will actively build the Church. This week, we were in the second part of chapter 17, where Paul is in Athens (the other Athens) engaging the philosophers on Mars Hill (also called the "Areopagus"). Paul knew that his normal message of how Jesus is the Messiah anticipated in the Old Testament would not work on these philosophers who knew little to nothing about the Old Testament. Instead, Paul preaches the same Gospel, but in a completely different way - in a way that did not refer to the Old Testament at all.
Discussing this passage, the students thought about ways to present the Gospel today without referring to the Bible specifically - which we need to know how to do in an age when the Bible is not universally regarded. There have been volumes written on how to do this - there are even writings from before Christ on how to demonstrate that God exists without using the Scriptures as proof.
Below is a quick summary of one such argument. Space does not allow a full explanation of this approach, but a summary will still give you a good idea of how the argument goes. Just like Paul's approach in Athens 2000 years ago, the approach starts with statements that the audience will readily agree with. Each step, however, should be discussed in much more detail when sharing this with others.
1. Everything that has a beginning has a cause.
2. The universe has a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
4. At the beginning of the universe, matter, energy and time also began.
5. Therefore, the cause of the universe cannot be comprised of matter or energy, and cannot be bound within time.
6. The universe bears evidence of design (this statement needs a lot of explanation for skeptics)
7. Therefore, the cause of the universe must be intelligent.
8. The existence of the universe is not necessary (it could have been the case that the universe never came into existence).
9. Therefore, the cause of the universe must have a will.
10. The universe exhibits beauty (ahthough beauty is subjective and could be accidental).
11. Therefore, it is likely that the cause of the universe appreciates beauty.
12. Since the cause of the universe has intelligence, a will, and likely emotions, the cause of the universe is a Being with personhood.
13. Also from evidence of the universe, we can discern that this Being is very powerful (or even omnipotent), very large (or even omnipresent), and very intelligent (or even omniscient).
So far, we have established that a Being (whom we can call "God") exists. We haven't proven it beyond all possible doubt, but at least we have shown that believe in the existence of God is rational. We have not shown, however, anything about Jesus or His Gospel.
1. The universe is finely tuned to allow life to exist (there is a lot of evidence to support this, which may be necessary to reference).
2. Therefore, God demonstrates care and concern for living creatures.
3. The basic human condition includes struggles with the existence of evil and the reality of death.
4. The nature of the universe suggests that God would be aware of man's basic condition, and furthermore, would have care and concern for it.
5. Question: Based on what we can tell about God from the universe, would you think that He would be the kind of God who would do nothing about man's basic condition, or would He be the kind of God who would do something? (If they say "nothing", then you may have to continue on the assumption that He would do something.)
6. Explore the major world religions with the one you're talking to and openly discuss which of these most effectively deals with man's basic condition. (Christianity is the only religion that offers a complete solution that fits with all we've discussed so far.)
If you can successfully walk someone through to this point, then the next step is crucial. People won't likely believe in Christ because they feel worked into a philosophical corner. So, we don't want to badger them into trying to make a decision. Simply tell them, "All we've done so far is to show that belief in Jesus is rational. So, let's conduct a spiritual experiment. Live life for the next month on the assumption that this is all true - just as an experiment. Do everything under the assumption that Jesus is who the Bible claims - follow the ways of righteousness, pray (even if you're praying to a God you don't fully believe in, yet), confess and repent, and so on. Experimentally live as you would if you knew for sure all this was true - and then after a month, assess whether or not you want to seriously explore the claims of Christ."
This is a lot fo information, and I don't expect you to absorb all of it at once. Rather, save this article and become familiar with the basic points, and when you find opportunities, explore one or two items with someone in conversation. When you become more and more familiar with the concepts, you'll find that you can talk with people about the God who exists without being preachy or pushy.
(Thanks to Dr. Doug Geivett for the idea of the "spiritual experiment".)
Discussing this passage, the students thought about ways to present the Gospel today without referring to the Bible specifically - which we need to know how to do in an age when the Bible is not universally regarded. There have been volumes written on how to do this - there are even writings from before Christ on how to demonstrate that God exists without using the Scriptures as proof.
Below is a quick summary of one such argument. Space does not allow a full explanation of this approach, but a summary will still give you a good idea of how the argument goes. Just like Paul's approach in Athens 2000 years ago, the approach starts with statements that the audience will readily agree with. Each step, however, should be discussed in much more detail when sharing this with others.
1. Everything that has a beginning has a cause.
2. The universe has a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
4. At the beginning of the universe, matter, energy and time also began.
5. Therefore, the cause of the universe cannot be comprised of matter or energy, and cannot be bound within time.
6. The universe bears evidence of design (this statement needs a lot of explanation for skeptics)
7. Therefore, the cause of the universe must be intelligent.
8. The existence of the universe is not necessary (it could have been the case that the universe never came into existence).
9. Therefore, the cause of the universe must have a will.
10. The universe exhibits beauty (ahthough beauty is subjective and could be accidental).
11. Therefore, it is likely that the cause of the universe appreciates beauty.
12. Since the cause of the universe has intelligence, a will, and likely emotions, the cause of the universe is a Being with personhood.
13. Also from evidence of the universe, we can discern that this Being is very powerful (or even omnipotent), very large (or even omnipresent), and very intelligent (or even omniscient).
So far, we have established that a Being (whom we can call "God") exists. We haven't proven it beyond all possible doubt, but at least we have shown that believe in the existence of God is rational. We have not shown, however, anything about Jesus or His Gospel.
1. The universe is finely tuned to allow life to exist (there is a lot of evidence to support this, which may be necessary to reference).
2. Therefore, God demonstrates care and concern for living creatures.
3. The basic human condition includes struggles with the existence of evil and the reality of death.
4. The nature of the universe suggests that God would be aware of man's basic condition, and furthermore, would have care and concern for it.
5. Question: Based on what we can tell about God from the universe, would you think that He would be the kind of God who would do nothing about man's basic condition, or would He be the kind of God who would do something? (If they say "nothing", then you may have to continue on the assumption that He would do something.)
6. Explore the major world religions with the one you're talking to and openly discuss which of these most effectively deals with man's basic condition. (Christianity is the only religion that offers a complete solution that fits with all we've discussed so far.)
If you can successfully walk someone through to this point, then the next step is crucial. People won't likely believe in Christ because they feel worked into a philosophical corner. So, we don't want to badger them into trying to make a decision. Simply tell them, "All we've done so far is to show that belief in Jesus is rational. So, let's conduct a spiritual experiment. Live life for the next month on the assumption that this is all true - just as an experiment. Do everything under the assumption that Jesus is who the Bible claims - follow the ways of righteousness, pray (even if you're praying to a God you don't fully believe in, yet), confess and repent, and so on. Experimentally live as you would if you knew for sure all this was true - and then after a month, assess whether or not you want to seriously explore the claims of Christ."
This is a lot fo information, and I don't expect you to absorb all of it at once. Rather, save this article and become familiar with the basic points, and when you find opportunities, explore one or two items with someone in conversation. When you become more and more familiar with the concepts, you'll find that you can talk with people about the God who exists without being preachy or pushy.
(Thanks to Dr. Doug Geivett for the idea of the "spiritual experiment".)
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
How to Respond to California's Decision
You have to be intentionally avoiding the news if you are unaware that the court system in California has recently "legislated from the bench" to legalize same-sex marriages. When I read of such things, I have a mixed bag of reactions:
But the best thing we should do is to throw our greatest energy into having strong, healthy, Christ-honoring marriages. If we simply defend "marriage" as between one man and one woman, we are not defending the biblical definition of marriage. The biblical definition is far greater than getting the right number of each gender into the definition. The best way we can defend marriage is by husbands loving their wives as Christ loves the Church, and by wives serving Christ through the way they respond to their husbands' God-given responsibilities. We can defend God's definition of marriage by raising our children to know and love Christ from the heart. We defend marriage by modeling good ones more than by arguing semantics.
In just a few weeks, we'll be starting a sermon series on biblical manhood and womanhood. Naturally, a biblical definition of marriage will be a big part of this series. I'm learning a lot as I prepare for this series, and I'm looking forward to walking through these lessons with you.
- Anger: My reasons for anger are many. Rulings such as this are clearly against God's written Word, and therefore clearly against God's will. Although I strongly abhor any form of discrimination or hateful responses to individuals, a homosexual lifestyle is a choice to violate God's express will. It is a defiant act against the perfect and holy God. Some dear loved ones of ours have made these choices - we are not angry with them, but we are angry about those choices. Furthermore, these choices are harmful to those who make them, and harmful to our society. A society that embraces a God-defying lifestyle harms itself thereby. When I see people choosing ways to harm our society, I get angry.
- Sadness: I also experience feelings of sadness. By openly defying God's will, people are missing out on a tight relationship with Him, as well as missing out on His greatest blessings. Not only are they hurting themselves, but they are cutting themselves off from a relationship with Christ where He abides with us because we obey His Word from a heart of love (John 14:21-24). We've known several who claim Christ and yet still choose a homosexual lifestyle - they talk very warmly about Christ. However, they are missing out on the deepest relationship Him possible because they deny the clear meaning of certain parts of the Bible. That makes me sad.
- Political ire: I also want to go all activist and help change the laws. And I believe we should be actively involved in the political process to defend the definition of marriage given to us by God.
- A sense of fulfilled expectations: And yet, I also feel a sense of no surprise whatsoever. These are the types of things Scripture tells us to anticipate as we approach the End Times. These developments are inevitable for a society that works so hard to relegate God to tiny corners of our lives. Nations that do not submit to God's most basic edicts invariably end up with this kind of moral degradation of its social norms. The more this nation says it doesn't want God's involvement, the more we will see the gravitational effect of fleshly desires to draw us ever downward morally.
- Confidence: I usually end up, though, with a sense of confidence. Marriage is something God defined, and it doesn't matter what a government says about it (even if it's the judicial branch performing a ventriloquist act to sound like the legislative branch). God is the one who determines what marriage is. He is the one who determines who is married and who is not married. A legal status, even if it uses the word "marriage", has no bearing on God's definition or God's declaration of marriage. The state cannot (CANNOT!) pose any threat at all to what God has established. The state can muddy the waters and make it hard for us to see clearly, but it cannot (CANNOT!) redefine biblical marriage. People are either married per the Bible or they are not, and no government can affect that standing. There is nothing (NOTHING!) they can do to stop us from practicing God's definition. The state could declare that people can get married to trees or their lawn furniture, but that doesn't mean that Christian marriage has changed in any way. God is not threatened by this. He is saddened, perhaps even angered, but not threatened.
But the best thing we should do is to throw our greatest energy into having strong, healthy, Christ-honoring marriages. If we simply defend "marriage" as between one man and one woman, we are not defending the biblical definition of marriage. The biblical definition is far greater than getting the right number of each gender into the definition. The best way we can defend marriage is by husbands loving their wives as Christ loves the Church, and by wives serving Christ through the way they respond to their husbands' God-given responsibilities. We can defend God's definition of marriage by raising our children to know and love Christ from the heart. We defend marriage by modeling good ones more than by arguing semantics.
In just a few weeks, we'll be starting a sermon series on biblical manhood and womanhood. Naturally, a biblical definition of marriage will be a big part of this series. I'm learning a lot as I prepare for this series, and I'm looking forward to walking through these lessons with you.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Indy 500
The number "500" represents the total number of minutes I slept the whole week of the youth mission trip with World Changers to Indianapolis.
If you missed our last Sunday School class, the youth did an excellent job of telling stories and answering questions about our mission trip. God was clearly at work in and through our youth, and it was my distinct privilege to be a part of their mission. What I appreciated most was getting to know our students at a deeper level than I've known them so far. God has created some great qualities in our youth.
My job was primarily as a driver. Get the youth there and back again safely. Betty Ann is the one who did the lion's share of the work. She has been working on this trip for the entire year with all the coordinating, all the training of our youth, all the leadership of fundraising, and even being a group leader while we were in Indianapolis. I'm sure even I am underestimating how many hours, how much lost sleep, and how much effort Betty Ann put into this trip. She was an absolute champ, and the fantastic trip that our youth had is in large part a result of her work and ministry for the Lord.
I've received a number of kind comments for my part in the trip, but she deserves ten times the accolades because she did at least ten times the work. Please make a point to share with Betty Ann your appreciation for her ministry. (I happen to know she likes coffee houses and anything chocolate, just so you know...)
To the youth, thanks for sharing your week with your old pastor. More importantly, thanks for sharing your lives with me.
If you missed our last Sunday School class, the youth did an excellent job of telling stories and answering questions about our mission trip. God was clearly at work in and through our youth, and it was my distinct privilege to be a part of their mission. What I appreciated most was getting to know our students at a deeper level than I've known them so far. God has created some great qualities in our youth.
My job was primarily as a driver. Get the youth there and back again safely. Betty Ann is the one who did the lion's share of the work. She has been working on this trip for the entire year with all the coordinating, all the training of our youth, all the leadership of fundraising, and even being a group leader while we were in Indianapolis. I'm sure even I am underestimating how many hours, how much lost sleep, and how much effort Betty Ann put into this trip. She was an absolute champ, and the fantastic trip that our youth had is in large part a result of her work and ministry for the Lord.
I've received a number of kind comments for my part in the trip, but she deserves ten times the accolades because she did at least ten times the work. Please make a point to share with Betty Ann your appreciation for her ministry. (I happen to know she likes coffee houses and anything chocolate, just so you know...)
To the youth, thanks for sharing your week with your old pastor. More importantly, thanks for sharing your lives with me.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
25 Years ... Big Deal ...
So, what's the big deal about the 25th Anniversary of Dublin Community Church / Dublin Bible Church anyway? Why make a fuss out of it? It's just another year, and millions of churches have crossed this milestone before us. Besides, isn't making a big deal out of this just patting ourselves on the back?
There are plenty of "second-order" reasons why we want to make a big deal out of this anniversary. For example, the church that planted us planted several other churches, too, but DBC is the only one still standing. In fact, the percentage is high for churches that are started but don't make it to 25 years. A band of folks get an idea that they'd like to start a new church for whatever reasons, get a lot of energy and excitement, storm out of the gates, but then when the "new church smell" fades, the enthusiasm wanes and the church closes its doors. Making it to 25 years is a big deal.
Furthermore, for a church of less than one hundred, it's even harder to still be around for the silver anniversary. And yet, DCC/DBC has not only kept the doors open, but has never missed a financial commitment to our missionaries, never failed to pay the light bill, never failed to put God's Word front and center of our teaching, and never even come close to the precipice of closing the doors. We may not be big, but we've never been on the ropes.
Additionally, we have had a number of challenges that can undermine a church's health. But rather than try to sweep them under the carpet, our leadership has consistently taken the approach of dealing with difficult issues straight on. One effect of this approach is that when our fallenness threatens our church, we don't worsen the problem by pretending that we're not all that fallen. One of our strengths is acknowledging our weaknesses and our reliance on God's power to carry us through.
But these are all "second-order" reasons. For me, the "first-order" reason to make a big deal out of 25 years is because God set the pattern of creating memorials. He created celebrations and feasts in order to give the people a way to remember what God has done in their midst. We must remember what God has done in order to trust Him for what He's going to do. We don't know what He will do in the future, but if we remember what He has done in the past, we can face forward with confidence that He will continue to be at work in our church and through our church. God wants us to create ways to remember His works.
All the good things that have happened within the DCC/DBC community are things He has done, not us. Even all the "second-order" reasons to celebrate are things He has done. A feast, just like in the Old Testament, is an enjoyable way to give God credit. As we enjoy one another's fellowship and enjoy delicious food, we feel the joy related to God's goodness. We have an event to hang memories on. We take time out to remember that God is God, and that He is at work in our fellowship.
Our celebration, again like those in the Old Testament, is also intended to pass down to our children the story of God's faithfulness in our midst. Our children need to see in the lives of our community that God is active. We can teach them about how He is active in the lives of people in the Bible, and we should. But we must also show them that He's not only at work in the lives of "Bible people" who live in "Bible lands" during the "Bible times." He's at work in the lives of us people right there right now. A fun feast teaches our children the goodness of God's activity in the lives of His people then and now.
Do join us this Saturday from 4-7 for a good ol' fashioned "pig pickin'", and then Sunday from 10 to noon for a celebration of what God has done within our people over the last 25 years.
There are plenty of "second-order" reasons why we want to make a big deal out of this anniversary. For example, the church that planted us planted several other churches, too, but DBC is the only one still standing. In fact, the percentage is high for churches that are started but don't make it to 25 years. A band of folks get an idea that they'd like to start a new church for whatever reasons, get a lot of energy and excitement, storm out of the gates, but then when the "new church smell" fades, the enthusiasm wanes and the church closes its doors. Making it to 25 years is a big deal.
Furthermore, for a church of less than one hundred, it's even harder to still be around for the silver anniversary. And yet, DCC/DBC has not only kept the doors open, but has never missed a financial commitment to our missionaries, never failed to pay the light bill, never failed to put God's Word front and center of our teaching, and never even come close to the precipice of closing the doors. We may not be big, but we've never been on the ropes.
Additionally, we have had a number of challenges that can undermine a church's health. But rather than try to sweep them under the carpet, our leadership has consistently taken the approach of dealing with difficult issues straight on. One effect of this approach is that when our fallenness threatens our church, we don't worsen the problem by pretending that we're not all that fallen. One of our strengths is acknowledging our weaknesses and our reliance on God's power to carry us through.
But these are all "second-order" reasons. For me, the "first-order" reason to make a big deal out of 25 years is because God set the pattern of creating memorials. He created celebrations and feasts in order to give the people a way to remember what God has done in their midst. We must remember what God has done in order to trust Him for what He's going to do. We don't know what He will do in the future, but if we remember what He has done in the past, we can face forward with confidence that He will continue to be at work in our church and through our church. God wants us to create ways to remember His works.
All the good things that have happened within the DCC/DBC community are things He has done, not us. Even all the "second-order" reasons to celebrate are things He has done. A feast, just like in the Old Testament, is an enjoyable way to give God credit. As we enjoy one another's fellowship and enjoy delicious food, we feel the joy related to God's goodness. We have an event to hang memories on. We take time out to remember that God is God, and that He is at work in our fellowship.
Our celebration, again like those in the Old Testament, is also intended to pass down to our children the story of God's faithfulness in our midst. Our children need to see in the lives of our community that God is active. We can teach them about how He is active in the lives of people in the Bible, and we should. But we must also show them that He's not only at work in the lives of "Bible people" who live in "Bible lands" during the "Bible times." He's at work in the lives of us people right there right now. A fun feast teaches our children the goodness of God's activity in the lives of His people then and now.
Do join us this Saturday from 4-7 for a good ol' fashioned "pig pickin'", and then Sunday from 10 to noon for a celebration of what God has done within our people over the last 25 years.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
What's Prince Caspian About?
I have been surprised by the number of times I've been asked this question. We've been announcing that our VBS this year will be based on the book Prince Caspian, and many of you have asked what it's all about. There's curiosity, but just not as much familiarity as there is with The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, the first book of C.S. Lewis's "The Chronicles of Narnia."
On the surface, the story is about the same four children from LWW, Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy Pevensie and their return to the mythical land of Narnia. One year has passed in their lives, but 1300 years has passed in Narnia - the timelines never match up between the two worlds. When they arrive, the learn of a young prince, Caspian, who is the rightful one to be King of Narnia, but the post has been assumed by his uncle Miraz, who ascended to the throne through deception and murder. The story follows the battle of Prince Caspian with his small army of talking beasts and creatures fighting under the banner of Aslan, the Great Lion, against King Miraz and his large army of battle-tested warrior men.
Below the surface, Lewis tells a fascinating tale of faith. Several storylines interweave to compare and contrast characters and the decisions they make according to their faith. Lucy and Trufflehunter (a talking badger) are consistently faithful (although not perfect), showing us what Lewis portrays as model faith. Trumpkin the dwarf begins from the perspective of what we would call "modernity" (the view that the only reality is physical and the only knowledge is scientific), but later he converts to adopt the same kind of faith as Trufflehunter. Nikabrik, another dwarf, displays what we would call "post-modernity" (the view that the spiritual world exists, but absolute Right and Wrong do not). The older Pevensie children display various levels of genuine faith that is plagued by doubts caused by the effects of modernity.
Ultimately, it seems to me that the story is about comparing the childlike faith that Jesus teaches us to have against the worldview of secular humanism. Throughout the story, the characters face decisions they need to make based on faith - will they display childlike faith, or will they consider themselves too "sophisticated", too "practical", and too self-reliant to trust? When you ponder all the problems that we work through as Christians, doesn't it usually come down to this very dilemma? Will I trust God at His Word, or will I rely on my own thoughts and actions?
Yes - it's told a children's story, and a story that children will love. But the biblical truths Lewis reveals appeal to a mature look at childlike faith. Lewis doesn't try to explain all these views, he doesn't use any of the technical terms, and he doesn't forcefit a storyline into an attempt to teach Philosophy 101. He simply tells the story of characters who come from these different perspectives and allows their worldview to drive the story. You won't come away from the story thinking that you've just had a lesson on the various kinds of faith - you'll come away appreciating a well-told story about different characters and their struggles, failures, and successes.
Please consider joining us Saturday afternoon at 3:30 pm to see the movie Prince Caspian. As of this writing, there are still tickets available. Call or email Debbi at the church. Also, please consider helping us put this VBS together - we need craftmakers, builders, fixers, painters, teachers, leaders, helpers, feeders, preparers - a whole host of tasks. Everyone has something they can do that would be a big help to Debbi and her crew.
Once a king or queen of Narnia, always a king or queen of Narnia!
On the surface, the story is about the same four children from LWW, Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy Pevensie and their return to the mythical land of Narnia. One year has passed in their lives, but 1300 years has passed in Narnia - the timelines never match up between the two worlds. When they arrive, the learn of a young prince, Caspian, who is the rightful one to be King of Narnia, but the post has been assumed by his uncle Miraz, who ascended to the throne through deception and murder. The story follows the battle of Prince Caspian with his small army of talking beasts and creatures fighting under the banner of Aslan, the Great Lion, against King Miraz and his large army of battle-tested warrior men.
Below the surface, Lewis tells a fascinating tale of faith. Several storylines interweave to compare and contrast characters and the decisions they make according to their faith. Lucy and Trufflehunter (a talking badger) are consistently faithful (although not perfect), showing us what Lewis portrays as model faith. Trumpkin the dwarf begins from the perspective of what we would call "modernity" (the view that the only reality is physical and the only knowledge is scientific), but later he converts to adopt the same kind of faith as Trufflehunter. Nikabrik, another dwarf, displays what we would call "post-modernity" (the view that the spiritual world exists, but absolute Right and Wrong do not). The older Pevensie children display various levels of genuine faith that is plagued by doubts caused by the effects of modernity.
Ultimately, it seems to me that the story is about comparing the childlike faith that Jesus teaches us to have against the worldview of secular humanism. Throughout the story, the characters face decisions they need to make based on faith - will they display childlike faith, or will they consider themselves too "sophisticated", too "practical", and too self-reliant to trust? When you ponder all the problems that we work through as Christians, doesn't it usually come down to this very dilemma? Will I trust God at His Word, or will I rely on my own thoughts and actions?
Yes - it's told a children's story, and a story that children will love. But the biblical truths Lewis reveals appeal to a mature look at childlike faith. Lewis doesn't try to explain all these views, he doesn't use any of the technical terms, and he doesn't forcefit a storyline into an attempt to teach Philosophy 101. He simply tells the story of characters who come from these different perspectives and allows their worldview to drive the story. You won't come away from the story thinking that you've just had a lesson on the various kinds of faith - you'll come away appreciating a well-told story about different characters and their struggles, failures, and successes.
Please consider joining us Saturday afternoon at 3:30 pm to see the movie Prince Caspian. As of this writing, there are still tickets available. Call or email Debbi at the church. Also, please consider helping us put this VBS together - we need craftmakers, builders, fixers, painters, teachers, leaders, helpers, feeders, preparers - a whole host of tasks. Everyone has something they can do that would be a big help to Debbi and her crew.
Once a king or queen of Narnia, always a king or queen of Narnia!
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Vote for Anderson in 2056
The 2056 presidential election has been heating up over the last several months, between the Demopublican candidate Senator Paulie Takallick Oreck, from New Polis, and the Repubocrat candidate Governor Joshua Anderson, originally from Dudley, Georgia. Until tonight, the presidential debates held so far have been spirited-but-polite exchanges over all the major issues: the economy, the continuing war on terror, global cooling, and the dwindling supply of our primary fuel source, kudzuthenol. But in tonight's debate, the mood changed.
Takina Head, the moderator of this debate hosted by satellite news channel FXCNNABC, crossed a line with one of her questions, venturing into the once-taboo topic of the candidates' past associations with pastors. No reporter has dared raise a question of this type since the presidential campaign 48 years ago.
Senator Oreck received the question first, "We have the video showing the pastor of a church you once attended claiming in a sermon that Jesus did not attempt to pull everyone in society out of poverty. Do you repudiate this teaching? Will you announce publicly that you no longer want to associate with this pastor?" Senator Oreck replied with a very long, confusing, and unenlightening explanation of his view on global cooling. The reporters had no follow up questions.
Then, the question turned to Governor Anderson, "We have several podcasts of the pastor from your childhood claiming that the book of Leviticus is in fact relevant to our lives here in the 21st Century. How do you explain this mindless drivel? Have you cut off all ties from this maniac pastor?" Governor Anderson carefully explained that even though he was in the nursery at the time, his parents explained to him year after year how Leviticus helps explain the cross of Jesus Christ. This reference to Jesus Christ and the cross could be the undoing of the governor's campaign.
Sensing a chance to embarrass the governor, the bank of reporters stumbled over one another with follow up questions. "Did that preacher actually talk about Jesus?" "Did he ever claim that Jesus was God?" "Did he actually teach that God is real?" "Did he claim the virgin birth and the resurrection?" "What other whacked out miracles did he claim?" "Do you still associate with this man?"
Governor Anderson calmly answered each question, not only affirming that his former pastor made all these claims of the miraculous, but that he also taught the scandalous concept of "grace" - an illogical theory which claims that men and women can do nothing at all to merit status before God, the gods, Mother Nature, the dryads, or the secular humanist ideal. Rather, so the theory claims, God bestows favor freely, according to his own sovereignty. Acting as if he had not yet done enough damage to his own campaign, the governor further affirmed that he himself believed in such things.
Governor Anderson finished his speech with a sense of assurance which seemed to belie the fact that he had practically forfeited the election. "I don't mind you taking offense to what my pastor said," he stated, "as long as what he was doing was just preaching the pure Gospel. If that's what offends you, then I stand by him! And I hope that all who claim Christ will be equally confident to stand tall when the only offense people find in them is that they believe in Jesus Christ."
Tomorrow's poll numbers will record how much damage the governor's remarks will have on his popularity, who has enjoyed up until now a double-digit lead. What cannot be measured, however, is the effect that his comments will have on Christians across the nation and their willingness to stand strong for what they believe, no matter what the consequences.
Takina Head, the moderator of this debate hosted by satellite news channel FXCNNABC, crossed a line with one of her questions, venturing into the once-taboo topic of the candidates' past associations with pastors. No reporter has dared raise a question of this type since the presidential campaign 48 years ago.
Senator Oreck received the question first, "We have the video showing the pastor of a church you once attended claiming in a sermon that Jesus did not attempt to pull everyone in society out of poverty. Do you repudiate this teaching? Will you announce publicly that you no longer want to associate with this pastor?" Senator Oreck replied with a very long, confusing, and unenlightening explanation of his view on global cooling. The reporters had no follow up questions.
Then, the question turned to Governor Anderson, "We have several podcasts of the pastor from your childhood claiming that the book of Leviticus is in fact relevant to our lives here in the 21st Century. How do you explain this mindless drivel? Have you cut off all ties from this maniac pastor?" Governor Anderson carefully explained that even though he was in the nursery at the time, his parents explained to him year after year how Leviticus helps explain the cross of Jesus Christ. This reference to Jesus Christ and the cross could be the undoing of the governor's campaign.
Sensing a chance to embarrass the governor, the bank of reporters stumbled over one another with follow up questions. "Did that preacher actually talk about Jesus?" "Did he ever claim that Jesus was God?" "Did he actually teach that God is real?" "Did he claim the virgin birth and the resurrection?" "What other whacked out miracles did he claim?" "Do you still associate with this man?"
Governor Anderson calmly answered each question, not only affirming that his former pastor made all these claims of the miraculous, but that he also taught the scandalous concept of "grace" - an illogical theory which claims that men and women can do nothing at all to merit status before God, the gods, Mother Nature, the dryads, or the secular humanist ideal. Rather, so the theory claims, God bestows favor freely, according to his own sovereignty. Acting as if he had not yet done enough damage to his own campaign, the governor further affirmed that he himself believed in such things.
Governor Anderson finished his speech with a sense of assurance which seemed to belie the fact that he had practically forfeited the election. "I don't mind you taking offense to what my pastor said," he stated, "as long as what he was doing was just preaching the pure Gospel. If that's what offends you, then I stand by him! And I hope that all who claim Christ will be equally confident to stand tall when the only offense people find in them is that they believe in Jesus Christ."
Tomorrow's poll numbers will record how much damage the governor's remarks will have on his popularity, who has enjoyed up until now a double-digit lead. What cannot be measured, however, is the effect that his comments will have on Christians across the nation and their willingness to stand strong for what they believe, no matter what the consequences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
