Just How Big Are You?

This semester is teaching me that basically everything I thought I knew about God I understand only because it has been chewed up for me and spit into my mouth for easy swallowing, like a nasty little baby bird or something. Another way of saying it is that in many ways I am only scraping my brain's fingernails (if my brain had hands, which it does) along the surface of the vastness of God and the consequences of belief when I really could be taking a huge shovel and plunging as deep as my mind can go. So, here are some things I have been chewing on. They are random, but just things on my heart. 

#1

It's high time my generation got past the pre-chewed food and nickel sayings about God, claiming to seek, all the while being perfectly content to responding with "Well, I believe it because the Bible says it." 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to diminish the authority of Scripture. Nor am I trying to make waves regarding its inerrancy. I believe we can take God at His word and trust in the truth of the Bible. Yes, DO believe everything the Bible says, but ask yourself, "WHY does the Bible say this? What is the context? Who is the author speaking to? How does the audience of the time compare to me, now?" Question, seek, search, grasp. 

#2

Let us not be guilty of reading into the Bible what we want and putting words in the Lord's mouth. Just guessing, but making God or the Bible say something that was not God's intention is maybe a sin. 

#3

God is not a big floating question mark. There are things about our God that can be understood. God wants to be known. He seeks us out so that He may be known. He gave us the Bible so that He can be known. There is a trend that I see in my generation of young Christians who want to do away with any preconceived notion or characteristic of God; I guess they want to make the discovery for themselves...I don't know. Point is, there are certain things God says He is, and things He is not. We cannot be swept away by this idea that theology is wrong and irrelevant, and that the great mystery is the only way that value can be found in the Christian lifestyle. It's dangerous to throw away reason and rationality, much less Scripture, and let the most mystical or mysterious feelings and findings become synonymous with God. 

That said, there is a lot to be said with regard to the mystery of God as well. I am of the opinion that if someone has "outgrown" the mysteries of God, it is evidence that they don't understand God at all. We must walk the fine line of seeking the truth and knowledge of God without boxing Him in. 

#4

Jesus was a man. A man's man. I love Mark Driscoll because he is not afraid to say that we've got Jesus all wrong. Look the dude up. Anyways, the pictures in your Sunday School class are inaccurate. Jesus was not a feathery-haired, lotioned-up, wussy European-metro guy with his beard perfectly trimmed and his baby blues glistening as his clean, dainty feet tiptoe around Jerusalem (like you would see in almost every portrayal of Jesus, as well as in most* people's minds). No. He was a Jew from Nazareth (which means not white. Hard to believe, I know). He was a construction worker. He hung out with 12 dudes and went all over the place preaching fearlessly. He got angry. He made people** angry. He was sarcastic at times. He got in people's faces over sin. He got the junk beat out of him and refused to change the story one bit. He was loyal to his friends and loyal to the gospel. Definitely a real man. I love it.

*including me 

**not just for the sake of starting a brawl (which is not manly),but because he exposed their lifestyles, their hypocrisy, and convicted them.

Ok. I'm done. Just had to get that out. 

Stuff Christians Like

http://stufffchristianslike.blogspot.com/2008/09/remix-53-saying-ill-pray-for-you-and.html

Just read it.

I think this guy and me could be best friends in another life. He says all the things I wonder about regarding church policy, youth group romance, awkward moments when you're a christian. All around it is usually a really interesting read.

Cheers!

Ugh

School has started yet again.

Working on a research paper over Horatio G. Spafford, the writer of the hymn "It is Well with my Soul."

I wish I had money to take a trip over Spring Break.

That is all.

Burn in Me

Fire of God, burn in me
Capture my heart again
Pull me through, make me clean
I'm reaching for Your love

Come carry me now, I'm crying out
For someone I cannot see
Come carry me now, I'm crying

How I long to broken, how I want to be near You
How my heart skips beats when Your love accepts me as I am

Breath of God, breathe on me
Hold me in Your hands
Take my life, this offering
and use me where I am

Come carry me now, I'm crying out
For someone I cannot see
Come carry me now, I'm crying

How I long to broken, how I want to be near You
How my heart skips beats when Your love accepts me as I am

Come burn in me again.

-The Glorious Unseen

Faith vs. Reason

Does God exist? It is the question that has in many ways been at the helm of many philosophical pursuits, and has been at the forefront of many discussions concerning human existence, morality, time, and mortality. Christian philosophers, having obviously resolved this issue in their own minds, now turn to try and decide on yet another conflict. Is arguing for the existence of God using logic and reason apart from divine revelation an acceptable method, or does it diminish the necessity of faith?
Scripture defines faith in this way: “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” (Hebrews 11:1, NASB) Given the natural inclination of Christians to use the Bible to define spiritual terms, this must be the understood meaning of the word “faith” in the context of the given topic. Faith in the Bible is defined in direct opposition to sight, or some physical understanding of something accepted (Rom. 8:24, 2 Cor. 4:18). So, given all these things, can evidence of God’s existence be accepted as credible apart from a total and complete acceptance based upon blind faith? There are some who say, decisively, “no.” To try and argue God’s existence apart from Scripture is, some would argue, futile and contradicts the whole purpose of faith. However, if one examines Scripture and draws some logical conclusions regarding the use of Scripture, it may be argued that these non-religious arguments are in fact a useful tool in communicating the reality of God’s being, and are in no way in opposition to the Biblical understanding of faith.
The apostle Paul, arguably one of the most learned authors in Scripture, is not silent concerning the knowledge of God and faith. For example, in Romans 1, Paul elaborates on God’s judgment over all men. He says it like this:
“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”
It is apparent from this passage that God has revealed Himself clearly; not through the Scriptures of old, and not through prophecies, but through His very creation. God has created in such a way that it reveals not only His existence, but a few of His attributes; namely, His omnipotence and majesty. As if this single passage were not sufficient, Paul gives more explanation in Romans 2:12-15.
“All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)”
The meaning could not be clearer: those who do not know Scripture are still held accountable for their actions, because God’s mandates are implanted in the very core of man.
Those who do not live by the Bible will still be judged according to the Bible, and if God makes Himself discoverable apart from divine revelation, then why should we not attempt to fill in every gap to make belief in God justifiable? He has given us the evidence needed for the primary belief, so should we not elaborate upon that evidence and attempt to make it irrefutable? Those who do not believe in God certainly will not believe the truth of Scripture; it is only after one comes to the point of belief that Scripture becomes relevant in their life. Logic and reason are valued so greatly in our world, so why not use them as a means to influence for good those who doubt? It is natural for men to be wary of divine claims, and it is not as if Christians who reason with unbelievers are conjuring up some false evidence, but only merely pointing to the divinely implanted knowledge that may be buried under a lifestyle of ignorance.
Reason and logic can only be taken so far, for it is the inclination of man to deny God, so faith must at some point step in. Arguments for God’s existence are merely tools that God may use to begin the persuasion, but ultimately God must provide the faith to carry one to salvation. There must never be the misunderstanding that belief in God is sufficient, for this can never bring about grace. Coming to belief in God is merely a return to what should naturally be the default position of all creatures, for even demons understand and believe that God exists (James 2:19). Reason and logic are only used to supplement the claims of Scripture, the supreme truth. This is ultimately the reason that faith and reason are not in conflict, for reason may only point to a Creator, but does not put one in a right relationship with Him.

Church

Philosophy in this era is characterized by an emphasis on the necessity of independence and individuality (not in the sense that individuals need to stand out, but stand separate) and the personal good without giving much consideration to the society as a whole. One could argue that this philosophy, or at least a few key points of it, has carried across all the years, stretching throughout historical, cultural, and geographical boundaries to be inherited by the great Western civilization train of thought. American society is built upon the foundation of independence, the right to the “pursuit of happiness,” and personal privacy and space. There is a need for community in some sense, to be sure, but the philosophy of a life lived separate from others is usually thought as something to be desired. But how should a Christian feel about this view? What part does the Church play in today’s world?
At the risk of speaking for the American Church as a whole, it could be assessed that there has been a movement stirring throughout the Christian population that the 1st century view is in fact not practical for today’s Christians, and an unnecessary waste of time. The obvious and countless enhancements in technology, the career, the family, travel, the general pace of life, and the apparent imperfections and hypocrisy of those who attend the local church prove, in many people’s minds, the triviality of church. The ever-growing popularity of the “It’s just me and Jesus,” Lone-Ranger type of thinking is proving to be a spiritual sort of independence with detrimental and sometimes harmful consequences.
Of course there are those who, at least in theory, support what tradition thinks to be a Biblical perspective of Christ’s Body. Hopefully it is understood by most that the Church is supposed to be a family of those who have been adopted by God, and in a healthy family there is community and love and trust. Thankfully most evangelical churches do not question these facts. Even the churches who some would take issue with on many other basic Christian doctrines have gotten this one thing right. Most who seek to serve Christ know that the Church is supposed to be the center of His work. Nevertheless, the concern, as it is with the Church in many other issues, is not in the understanding, but in the living. Those who are dedicated followers of Christ know, in the broadest terms, what the Church is supposed to look like, but what steps are being taken toward conforming to the Scriptural blueprint?
Not only is the Church as a community is practical and applicable to today’s society, but also obedience to Christ is necessarily connected to the Church and love of the Church not as an activity or spot on the weekly schedule, but as a living organism, a way of life. A Christian’s heart should beat in time with Christ’s, and Christ’s love is not only for the individual who has received grace, but the individual’s new family and the active Body at work in the world. If a human’s true goal in life is indeed to find happiness, and a Christian would assert that true happiness is found only with belief in and relationship with God, then a healthy relationship with God, who is perfect, means that we must love what He loves. The Bible clearly states that God loves the Church and died for Her. In Ephesians 5 Paul admonishes husbands to “love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” So, it is made known to us that Christ loved and died for the Church as a whole. Those who are and will be drawn to Christ become members of His body, and must love his or her fellow members as Christ does.
Contrary to popular belief, being active in the body of Christ means more than checking off attendance weekly at the Sunday worship gathering. In Acts 2 the author Luke gives us a picture of the early church. He says starting in verse 42:
“They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe; and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles. And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common; and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need. Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved.”
Will every church look exactly like a first century gathering in Jerusalem? Decisively not, but there are some key elements that can be taken from this picture of the early church and used in any context. First, it is important to note from the passage that a healthy church should be engaged in worship through fellowship, prayer, teaching of Scripture, and sharing meals in a corporate setting. These actions simply cannot be achieved in a solitary setting, and they are important for healthy growth in relationship with God, which is the basis for true happiness. Additionally, all believers were together and had all things in common. There was sharing and sacrifice for another’s benefit. I don’t believe that this passage is encouraging any form of communist society, but rather the idea that there is nothing that is your own in the end, for we are all merely stewards of what is God’s, and we have already received the ultimate gift, which is Christ Himself, so there is no benefit in hoarding everything away if another of God’s children are lacking. The early church is characterized by a strong belief in God’s sovereignty and understanding that God would provide their needs, as Jesus taught in Matthew 6. 
We see in the New Testament the great emphasis put on the Church. Nearly all the epistles in the New Testament are written to a church body, and they are instructions given in a church setting. Truly, these concepts can and should be applied to the everyday life of an individual, but I believe instruction given in the New Testament is given to all individuals in a church so that the Church may benefit, and believers may be encouraged, supported, loved, and held accountable in the Church. It is evident through the letters in the New Testament that even (and especially) the early church was far from perfect, but that fact was not grounds for ignoring or degrading the Church, counting it as a worthless band of hypocrites. Only through participation and interaction with the Church as family can one expect to gain that closeness with God that He truly desires for all of us. It is His design, perfect in every way. God is glorified to work through the Church’s imperfections, and our joy is made more full in the gathering and living in a Church. It is only through being the church that we adhere to Christ’s wishes, only through living in the body of Christ that we get closer to perfect joy in Him. It is this point that we as Christians in the 21st century must grasp if we long to know Christ in a more intimate way.

Social Justice and the Gospel of Jesus Christ

There seems to be a grassroots movement among young adults in evangelical churches and schools to seek to solve the many issues that encompass the social injustice in the world today in some pretty radical ways. This movement has been at the forefront at a lot of student led programs at my own school, Oklahoma Baptist University for the last few years that I have been here. These efforts are commendable and, I think, a necessary vocalization and revelation of the problems worldwide in numerous people groups.

However, it appears that that within this movement there are those who would seek to elevate the injustices of hunger, poverty, child labor, and the like over the gospel itself, as sort of a neo-gospel with Jesus in the backdrop, as only the means by which we are called to address these issues. Love, in the broadest sense, is sought to be shown through strictly material and non-vocal ways, i.e. the ever popular "I'll share the love of Jesus by my actions, and that will be enough."

I take issue with this. I do not deny that some of the American church, at times myself included, has taken a sort of laissez faire approach to the material and immediate needs of people around the world, and indeed, even in our own nation. Regardless, Christians simply cannot divorce the vocal, deliberate gospel from the mission to eliminate social injustice. It is an empty attempt to soften the blow of the necessity of Jesus above all else. If we were truly to follow the example of Christ, it would be seen that He DID heal and he DID provide for people's material needs, but not without confronting the people with their sins and preaching the good news of the Kingdom.
Ultimately the message must be that regardless of whether or not people have a full stomach or enough money in the bank, whether or not they are healthy and are able to provide, Jesus IS sufficient. To elevate the mortal and material above the spiritual is to misrepresent Christ and to misunderstand why He came.