Self Esteem and The Gospel of Grace:
Can they peacefully co-exist?
I’ve discovered something recently that I’m quite sure that modern evangelicalism is sorely lacking. Before I tell you what that thing is, let me tell you how I found it.
I’ve been listening to a lot of old hymns.
Old hymns have gotten a bad rap from Christians today. They will say, “those old songs use antiquated words and phrases that are so out of touch. People don’t talk like that these days.”
And I would say, “Bingo. People don’t talk like that these days. And that’s precisely the problem!”
What did Puritan hymn writers understand that today’s Christians don’t understand? What did they express in their songs that Christians are not used to hearing? Well, the answer to that would be a pretty long list of rich theological themes. However, for today I want to attempt to articulate just one prevalent theme in old hymns: Depravity.
Old hymn writers seem incredibly adept at graphic verbal expressions of their own depravity. You just don’t hear that these days. Wretchedness doesn’t sell well in a world of self-esteem.
Obviously when we think of expressions of depravity in old hymns the first hymn that comes to mind is “Amazing Grace” by John Newton. The song’s first line says it all:
“Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me.”
Wretch is a word that we don’t really hear unless we are singing hymns. What does it mean? Here’s Webster’s definition: : a base, despicable, or vile person
Let’s go to another hymn. Look at the song “There is a Fountain Filled With Blood.”
The second verse talks about the thief on the cross next to Jesus.
The dying thief rejoiced to see that fountain in his day; and there may I, though vile as he, wash all my sins away.
Vile? Am I vile? Are you vile? What does vile mean?
Here’s Webster to weigh in on the definition:
1 a: morally despicable or abhorrent
b: physically repulsive : foul
2: of little worth or account: mean
3: tending to degrade
4: disgustingly or utterly bad
Wow. I always thought people who wrote hymns were pretty righteous characters? Talk about low self-esteem?
I could go on and on quoting expressions of human depravity in the church’s historic hymnody or in the writings of ministers from just a couple of centuries ago. However, here’s the million-dollar question. Why were they so hung up on talking about their wretchedness? And, why aren’t we equally focused on the topic?
I would contend that the reason that the hymn writers devoted so much ink to wretchedness is because they spent a lot of time studying their bible and their own heart.
Look at what Paul says in Romans 3:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
13 “Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”
14 “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 in their paths are ruin and misery,
17 and the way of peace they have not known.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
That’s a pretty sweeping indictment of the entire human race. And, remember, Paul wasn’t exempting himself from that charge. He referred to himself at “the chief of sinners.” And, in Romans 7 as he expounds on his own struggles with sin he says, “Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from this body of death?”
So, if the concept of human depravity and wretchedness is thoroughly biblical, why don’t we hear about it any more?
I submit that the “Self-Esteem Gospel”, which is no Gospel at all, has gradually chipped away our robust understanding of depravity. It hasn’t removed it leaving an empty hole. Rather, our vileness has been replaced with a shoulder shrugging, aw shucks, nobody’s perfect view of sin. We’ve gone from being “dead in sins and trespasses” to having a little bit of a sniffle.
The Self-Esteem Gospel is so popular outside the church we’ve invited it in and made it a part of our theology. And, in doing so, we’ve turned the cross on its head. Here’s how it sounds when preached:
“God looked down from heaven. He was so overcome with your awesome-ness that he came up with a plan to express how awesome you are. He sent his only Son to die on the cross! So, show Jesus that you agree with his summation and ask him into your heart. He’ll help you become even more awesome!”
If that sounds ridiculous and far-fetched, you haven’t been to a Christian bookstore lately. I know a church in my community that had the following title for their Easter Sunday sermon: “God Believes In You!”
Sickening.
I visited Christianbook.com. I did a search for “self-esteem.” My search yielded 489 books. Almost all of the books were about how to boost, build or bolster our self image. Almost all of the books were written in the last couple of decades.
Next, I searched with the word “depravity.” My search yielded 26 books. The first book that came up was Martin Luther’s “The Bondage of the Will” written in 1525. Several other books on the list were written over 100 years ago.
Here’s the opposite of the Self Esteem Gospel.
“God looked down from heaven. He saw the wickedness of the human race. He devised a plan to redeem them from their sins. Their sins and depravity were so great that the only sacrifice that could pay the penalty for their sins was the death of His only Son on the cross. He sent Jesus to die on the cross for our sins. Not because we are good. Rather, because He is good. Jesus took a punishment that he didn’t deserve- so that we can receive the salvation that we don’t deserve.”
Do you see the difference? It is not a small difference. It’s huge. When we lose the doctrine of human depravity, we lose the Gospel. If I’m not depraved than I don’t need a Savior… I just need some advice.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
It's Just A Flesh Wound!
There’s a classic scene from the film Monty Python and The Holy Grail. If you aren’t familiar with Monty Python, they were a sketch comedy group from England that also made a few movies. Their sense of humor is very British and very funny. The movie is set in medieval times. The scene is when King Arthur fights the dreaded Black Knight in a sword-fight. The Black Knight is the epitome of high self-esteem.
During the duel, King Arthur manages to cut off both of the Black Knight’s arms. However, the Black Knight’s confidence is unshaken. King Arthur points out that The Black Knight has no arms. The Black Knight responds, “It’s just a flesh wound!” King Arthur continues to cut off both of The Black Knight’s legs. But, The Black Knight continues to hurl insults and threats- even though he’s been reduced to an armless, legless torso.
Seeing The Black Knight’s brazen confidence is what makes the scene so funny. His confidence is completely nonsensical. Hearing an armless, legless torso hurl insults at sword-wielding man is pretty ridiculous. That’s what makes it funny. The Black Knight’s self-esteem wasn’t based on reality.
We have a similar problem. We’re guilty of being The Black Knight. However, the wound that we feel compelled to minimize is the wound that is our own depravity. Although scripture presents overwhelming evidence to us of the death-blow that we’ve received- we’re determined to arrogantly shout, “It’s just a flesh wound!”
However, scripture doesn’t paint our depravity as “just a flesh wound.” Rather, depravity’s affect on us has left us dead. That’s right, dead. Unable to do anything but sin.
Look at how Ephesians 2:1-2 describes our condition apart from Christ:
“And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience”
Did you get that? We are spiritually “dead” in our unregenerate state. Not wounded, dead. That powerlessness that has overtaken all of us in our fallen condition is further seen in Jesus’ words from John 6:44:
“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.”
Notice he says “no one can come to me unless the Father draws him.” We’d be foolish to miss the meaning of the word “can.” Can denotes ability. As in, “I can ride a bike.” Or, “I can’t fly like a bird.” Here in John 6 Jesus is telling us that apart from God drawing us to himself, we don’t have the ability to come to him.
It should also be noted that not only do we not have the ability, we don’t have the desire. Look at Christ’s words in John 8:44:
“You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires.”
Why don’t we have that ability or desire? Again, it’s because of our depravity. Our natural desire is to please ourself and our self-focused appetites. We don’t want to repent. We don’t want follow Christ. Those desires aren’t in us at birth. What is inside of us? Look at what Jesus says in Mark 7:21-23:
“For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”
Wow! So much for “Gentle Jesus, Meek and Mild.” Those are harsh words. But, if we’re honest with ourselves, we know them to be true.
So, that’s the doctrine of Depravity. We’re powerless in and of ourselves to repent. We don’t want to die to ourself. Criminals don’t seek out policemen or the police station. We are dead in our sin and trespasses. True repentance is not something that we will seek out on our own.
Now, here’s the million dollar question. Why in the world would we want to emphasize this biblical doctrine. What value is there in reminding people of their “deadness?” Why would we want to tell people that they aren’t sick but rather dead?
Well, the truth is that modern American Christianity doesn’t want to emphasize those scriptural teachings. Take a stroll through your local Christian book stores and you’ll find that the best sellers either minimize or eliminate human depravity altogether. Rather, the books which fly off of the shelves focus on our innate goodness. We’re good people and we just need a little nudge from Jesus to reach our full potential. In these books Jesus trades in his role as saviour for another role. He removes his crown of thorns to put on a hat that says “Life-Coach.”
The problem with losing the doctrine of depravity is that when we discard it, we discard Christianity. If I’m not utterly powerless, then I might not need a saviour. I might just need some moral advice. I might not need a transformed heart. I might just need some tools. But, there is a problem with advice and tools. Tools must be taken into my own hand. I must employ those tools to become my own surgeon. But, can a dead man operate on himself? The problem with advice is that I must follow it. But can a corpse follow anyone or anything? Tools and advice take my eyes off of the Cross. Tools and advice focus my attention on my own tweaking and adjusting.
Tools do me no good. I’m an armless, legless torso. I can’t walk to get the tools. I can’t pick them up. And, I don’t want to... I’m dead.
I don’t need first aid. I need a miraculous operation to bring me to life. Not back to life, but to make me alive for the very first time.
Romans 8:24-25a:
Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!
Are you, like the Black Knight, convinced of your own strength?
During the duel, King Arthur manages to cut off both of the Black Knight’s arms. However, the Black Knight’s confidence is unshaken. King Arthur points out that The Black Knight has no arms. The Black Knight responds, “It’s just a flesh wound!” King Arthur continues to cut off both of The Black Knight’s legs. But, The Black Knight continues to hurl insults and threats- even though he’s been reduced to an armless, legless torso.
Seeing The Black Knight’s brazen confidence is what makes the scene so funny. His confidence is completely nonsensical. Hearing an armless, legless torso hurl insults at sword-wielding man is pretty ridiculous. That’s what makes it funny. The Black Knight’s self-esteem wasn’t based on reality.
We have a similar problem. We’re guilty of being The Black Knight. However, the wound that we feel compelled to minimize is the wound that is our own depravity. Although scripture presents overwhelming evidence to us of the death-blow that we’ve received- we’re determined to arrogantly shout, “It’s just a flesh wound!”
However, scripture doesn’t paint our depravity as “just a flesh wound.” Rather, depravity’s affect on us has left us dead. That’s right, dead. Unable to do anything but sin.
Look at how Ephesians 2:1-2 describes our condition apart from Christ:
“And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience”
Did you get that? We are spiritually “dead” in our unregenerate state. Not wounded, dead. That powerlessness that has overtaken all of us in our fallen condition is further seen in Jesus’ words from John 6:44:
“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.”
Notice he says “no one can come to me unless the Father draws him.” We’d be foolish to miss the meaning of the word “can.” Can denotes ability. As in, “I can ride a bike.” Or, “I can’t fly like a bird.” Here in John 6 Jesus is telling us that apart from God drawing us to himself, we don’t have the ability to come to him.
It should also be noted that not only do we not have the ability, we don’t have the desire. Look at Christ’s words in John 8:44:
“You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires.”
Why don’t we have that ability or desire? Again, it’s because of our depravity. Our natural desire is to please ourself and our self-focused appetites. We don’t want to repent. We don’t want follow Christ. Those desires aren’t in us at birth. What is inside of us? Look at what Jesus says in Mark 7:21-23:
“For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”
Wow! So much for “Gentle Jesus, Meek and Mild.” Those are harsh words. But, if we’re honest with ourselves, we know them to be true.
So, that’s the doctrine of Depravity. We’re powerless in and of ourselves to repent. We don’t want to die to ourself. Criminals don’t seek out policemen or the police station. We are dead in our sin and trespasses. True repentance is not something that we will seek out on our own.
Now, here’s the million dollar question. Why in the world would we want to emphasize this biblical doctrine. What value is there in reminding people of their “deadness?” Why would we want to tell people that they aren’t sick but rather dead?
Well, the truth is that modern American Christianity doesn’t want to emphasize those scriptural teachings. Take a stroll through your local Christian book stores and you’ll find that the best sellers either minimize or eliminate human depravity altogether. Rather, the books which fly off of the shelves focus on our innate goodness. We’re good people and we just need a little nudge from Jesus to reach our full potential. In these books Jesus trades in his role as saviour for another role. He removes his crown of thorns to put on a hat that says “Life-Coach.”
The problem with losing the doctrine of depravity is that when we discard it, we discard Christianity. If I’m not utterly powerless, then I might not need a saviour. I might just need some moral advice. I might not need a transformed heart. I might just need some tools. But, there is a problem with advice and tools. Tools must be taken into my own hand. I must employ those tools to become my own surgeon. But, can a dead man operate on himself? The problem with advice is that I must follow it. But can a corpse follow anyone or anything? Tools and advice take my eyes off of the Cross. Tools and advice focus my attention on my own tweaking and adjusting.
Tools do me no good. I’m an armless, legless torso. I can’t walk to get the tools. I can’t pick them up. And, I don’t want to... I’m dead.
I don’t need first aid. I need a miraculous operation to bring me to life. Not back to life, but to make me alive for the very first time.
Romans 8:24-25a:
Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!
Are you, like the Black Knight, convinced of your own strength?
Monday, April 16, 2007
The Postmodern Weather Forecast
The Postmodern Weather Man
Postmodernism is a term that might be unfamiliar to you. However, no matter who you are you’ve been exposed to one form or another of postmodernism. Postmodernism is a school of thought that says that all truth is relative. Although postmodernism rears it’s head in a number of situations in life, no situation is more prevalent than when it comes to discussing religion and theology.
A preacher stands in the public square on his soapbox and declares that one day every human will stand before God to answer for his or her sins. He declares that God will hold every human accountable for every thought, word and deed. A passerby listens politely to the preacher. This passerby is shocked to hear the preacher use words like sin, hell, repentance and judgment.
After the sermon the preacher approaches this passerby to personally challenge him to repent of his sins and trust in Christ as his only hope for salvation. It is here that the preacher’s arguments and exhortations are not met with outright rejection. Rather they are met with something much more difficult to refute. Postmodernism.
Postmodernism says that no one is wrong. We just have a “different truth.” What’s true for one person isn’t necessarily true for another. It all sounds very polite. I can reject what you are saying without having to call you wrong! Convenient, huh? The postmodern person says to the Christian, “If that understanding of spirituality works for you then it’s true for you. However, it’s not my truth. My God doesn’t work like that.” This makes the postmodern person feel like they are taking the high ground. They can kindly reject the preacher’s words without calling anyone wrong. After all, we’re all just on a quest for the truth that works for us.
Here’s the problem with postmodernism. The postmodernists won’t (and can’t) embrace their ideology across the board. They must abandon it. Eventually they have to admit that all truth is not relative. There is a truth that will one day affect us all. God’s righteous judgment is that truth.
Let’s compare the street preacher’s challenge to repent with something that seems completely different. Weather forecasts.
Much of our lives are spend indoors. In my line of work, I ply my trade indoors. In my air conditioned home and car I’m able to set the thermostat to the temperature of my own liking. As such, I seldom pay much attention to the weather forecast. Whether it (the weather) is hot or cold, I’m typically only affected by it during my walk from a building to a car. I’ve never farmed. I don’t camp, hike or jog. So, my indoor world is designed around my comfort and desires. When I want it warmer or cooler, I just turn the dial to my exact liking.
There are however a few times each year when my attention is focused on weather forecasts. When extreme weather such as tornadoes, floods, ice storms, or hurricanes are looming my attention is invariably pulled to the weather. In those instances I’m compelled to care by the chance that what’s happening outdoors might interrupt my comfortable indoor life. In fact, I must respond to the forecaster’s warning. The stakes are too high for me to ignore. If the weatherman is right and I ignore his warning I will perish. We’ve all seen the fate of those who didn’t heed the warnings to flee from the path of the approaching storms.
What if those in the storm’s path give the weatherman a postmodern response? What if they say, “That’s not my truth. What’s true for you isn’t necessarily true for me.” Will that sincerely held belief keep them from drowning? Freezing to death? Will that belief keep them from being blown away by gale force winds?
Postmodernists, when pressed, can get pretty indignant. Warn a postmodern that failure to repent of his sins will result in his damnation and he’ll likely get angry. He’ll probably counter with this response. “You can believe whatever you want. But, to try and use fear and intimidation to frighten people into your religious view is reprehensible. You should be ashamed of yourself!”
Isn’t that what a good weatherman does? A good weatherman uses fear to get us to act. We’d never accuse the weatherman of using strong-arm tactics to instill fear in us. We know that’s his job. Should he be ashamed of himself?
Much of our lives are spent in a world of our spiritual design. We believe that we can determine our spiritual destiny’s reality by adjusting our mind to a spiritual world of our own comfort. If we want a soft and cuddly God who is all accepting, that’s cool. If we want a wrath filled God, that’s cool too. We believe that we can set our thoughts on that God for ourselves. We can just define our own “truth.”
However, just as extreme weather forces us to turn our attention on weather and meteorology. Extreme life situations force us to turn our attention on religion and theology. Just as the fear that extreme weather could impact my man made indoor world (like blowing it away or flooding it)- extreme life situations often push us to examine the chance that our self-made view of God could get impacted by the real God.
Extreme weather shakes us and says, “You aren’t in control. Pay attention. Are you sure that you’ll survive? Take cover! Respond or perish.”
Extreme life situations shake us spiritually as well. They remind us, “There is a day coming when you’ll die. Are you prepared? You aren’t in control. Will you make it?”
A parent dies.
The doctor tells you that you’ve got cancer.
A car accident claims the life of your teenage son or daughter.
Both the street preacher and the weatherman are making a forecast of what will happen. We’d never give the weatherman a postmodern response. We’d never claim that the weatherman’s forecast is “his truth” and doesn’t apply to us. When we think about doing that we immediately see the folly of postmodernism.
Truth is truth. Truth is universal. It applies to all.
A man once said to a famous Christian apologist, “There is no absolute truth.”
The apologist replied, “Is that true?”
“Yes, it is” the man replied.
“Are you sure?”
“Absolutely!” the man replied.
Postmodernism is a foolish school of thought that easily crumbles under the simplest of questions.
Postmodernism is a term that might be unfamiliar to you. However, no matter who you are you’ve been exposed to one form or another of postmodernism. Postmodernism is a school of thought that says that all truth is relative. Although postmodernism rears it’s head in a number of situations in life, no situation is more prevalent than when it comes to discussing religion and theology.
A preacher stands in the public square on his soapbox and declares that one day every human will stand before God to answer for his or her sins. He declares that God will hold every human accountable for every thought, word and deed. A passerby listens politely to the preacher. This passerby is shocked to hear the preacher use words like sin, hell, repentance and judgment.
After the sermon the preacher approaches this passerby to personally challenge him to repent of his sins and trust in Christ as his only hope for salvation. It is here that the preacher’s arguments and exhortations are not met with outright rejection. Rather they are met with something much more difficult to refute. Postmodernism.
Postmodernism says that no one is wrong. We just have a “different truth.” What’s true for one person isn’t necessarily true for another. It all sounds very polite. I can reject what you are saying without having to call you wrong! Convenient, huh? The postmodern person says to the Christian, “If that understanding of spirituality works for you then it’s true for you. However, it’s not my truth. My God doesn’t work like that.” This makes the postmodern person feel like they are taking the high ground. They can kindly reject the preacher’s words without calling anyone wrong. After all, we’re all just on a quest for the truth that works for us.
Here’s the problem with postmodernism. The postmodernists won’t (and can’t) embrace their ideology across the board. They must abandon it. Eventually they have to admit that all truth is not relative. There is a truth that will one day affect us all. God’s righteous judgment is that truth.
Let’s compare the street preacher’s challenge to repent with something that seems completely different. Weather forecasts.
Much of our lives are spend indoors. In my line of work, I ply my trade indoors. In my air conditioned home and car I’m able to set the thermostat to the temperature of my own liking. As such, I seldom pay much attention to the weather forecast. Whether it (the weather) is hot or cold, I’m typically only affected by it during my walk from a building to a car. I’ve never farmed. I don’t camp, hike or jog. So, my indoor world is designed around my comfort and desires. When I want it warmer or cooler, I just turn the dial to my exact liking.
There are however a few times each year when my attention is focused on weather forecasts. When extreme weather such as tornadoes, floods, ice storms, or hurricanes are looming my attention is invariably pulled to the weather. In those instances I’m compelled to care by the chance that what’s happening outdoors might interrupt my comfortable indoor life. In fact, I must respond to the forecaster’s warning. The stakes are too high for me to ignore. If the weatherman is right and I ignore his warning I will perish. We’ve all seen the fate of those who didn’t heed the warnings to flee from the path of the approaching storms.
What if those in the storm’s path give the weatherman a postmodern response? What if they say, “That’s not my truth. What’s true for you isn’t necessarily true for me.” Will that sincerely held belief keep them from drowning? Freezing to death? Will that belief keep them from being blown away by gale force winds?
Postmodernists, when pressed, can get pretty indignant. Warn a postmodern that failure to repent of his sins will result in his damnation and he’ll likely get angry. He’ll probably counter with this response. “You can believe whatever you want. But, to try and use fear and intimidation to frighten people into your religious view is reprehensible. You should be ashamed of yourself!”
Isn’t that what a good weatherman does? A good weatherman uses fear to get us to act. We’d never accuse the weatherman of using strong-arm tactics to instill fear in us. We know that’s his job. Should he be ashamed of himself?
Much of our lives are spent in a world of our spiritual design. We believe that we can determine our spiritual destiny’s reality by adjusting our mind to a spiritual world of our own comfort. If we want a soft and cuddly God who is all accepting, that’s cool. If we want a wrath filled God, that’s cool too. We believe that we can set our thoughts on that God for ourselves. We can just define our own “truth.”
However, just as extreme weather forces us to turn our attention on weather and meteorology. Extreme life situations force us to turn our attention on religion and theology. Just as the fear that extreme weather could impact my man made indoor world (like blowing it away or flooding it)- extreme life situations often push us to examine the chance that our self-made view of God could get impacted by the real God.
Extreme weather shakes us and says, “You aren’t in control. Pay attention. Are you sure that you’ll survive? Take cover! Respond or perish.”
Extreme life situations shake us spiritually as well. They remind us, “There is a day coming when you’ll die. Are you prepared? You aren’t in control. Will you make it?”
A parent dies.
The doctor tells you that you’ve got cancer.
A car accident claims the life of your teenage son or daughter.
Both the street preacher and the weatherman are making a forecast of what will happen. We’d never give the weatherman a postmodern response. We’d never claim that the weatherman’s forecast is “his truth” and doesn’t apply to us. When we think about doing that we immediately see the folly of postmodernism.
Truth is truth. Truth is universal. It applies to all.
A man once said to a famous Christian apologist, “There is no absolute truth.”
The apologist replied, “Is that true?”
“Yes, it is” the man replied.
“Are you sure?”
“Absolutely!” the man replied.
Postmodernism is a foolish school of thought that easily crumbles under the simplest of questions.
Monday, March 26, 2007
At what point does it become tacky?
Driving through my town this week I noticed something a little disturbing. A gas station that’s been closed for quite some time was being reopened as a coffee shop. That wasn’t the disturbing part. In fact, that’s quite good. I’m a sucker for a good cup of coffee. It turns out that the coffee shop is a Christian themed coffee shop. I’ll admit, I don’t know what makes a coffee shop sufficiently “Christian.” Are some coffees more appropriate for Christians than others? Does that even matter? Can you just play some Amy Grant or Third Day CDs? Is that enough to qualify? We may never know.
However, none of those concerns explain my unease with this new Christian watering hole. It’s the name. Brace yourself. It’s pretty bad. Here it is: Jehovah’s Java, The Great I AM Coffee Shop and Café. Take a look at the attached picture. As Dave Barry is famous for saying, “I am not making this up!”
Let’s remember, Jehovah is one of the names of God in the Old Testament. He also tells us that his name is sacred. There are orthodox Jews that don’t write or speak the name of God. They consider it to be that Holy.
Does this bother you? What if someone opened a car dealership called: Jesus Christ Ford Lincoln Mercury? Would we (Christians) be okay with that? Does Jesus endorse Fords? Is He cool with using his name to sell cars? Can I play enough Christian pop music in the showroom to make Him cool with it? How many “Precious Moments” ceramic figurines do I need to strategically place near the brochure rack to meet the reverence quota? 4? 20? Is my hypothetical car dealership situation really any different from Jehovah’s Java? I don’t think so.
I don’t know the owners of Jehovah’s Java. I hope they are operating from a pure motive. However, it seems symptomatic of modern evangelism. In our attempts to appear relevant and cool we’ve surrendered something that wasn’t ours to surrender. God’s Holy name is being used to sell coffee.
I’m a Protestant. As such, we (Protestants) don’t focus as much of our attention on Mary as our Roman Catholic friends. However, would it be okay for me to open up a business across from a Roman Catholic Church? Sure. Can I open it in hopes of bringing in some neighborhood Catholics? I don’t see why not. But, what if my business is called: Virgin Mary’s Holy Mother of God Check Cashing and Pawn Shop? I’m cringing as I type this. That would be bad right? Right? Offensive? Of course! We’d never think of it. I’m sure my Catholic friends would be put off by such a name. That’s assuming that I’d have any Catholic friends after naming my pawn-shop after the woman who gave birth to the Christ-child. Tacky doesn’t begin to describe it.
Then why aren’t we outraged when we see Jehovah’s Java? Why do people think it’s cute? Sometimes we (Protestants) criticize Roman Catholics for their elevation of Mary. However, it seems that the real sin is that we modern evangelicals have lowered God. Our Catholic friends hold the name of Mary in higher esteem than we hold the name of God.
Monday, March 12, 2007
Science and the Bible
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about creationism. I affirm the infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible. As such, I believe the world was created in a literal six twenty-four hour days. I realize that those beliefs fly squarely in the face of what modern science tells us. In fact, that makes me, and the millions who hold the same view, look naïve and foolish. How do we reconcile the Biblical account of creation with the claims of modern science?
I confess that I often find myself trying to keep score in the battle between secular science and Biblical creationists. Biblical creationists in recent years have grown more and more aggressive and creative in their tactics for combating Darwinian Evolution. There are the state-by-state and district-by-district battles for inclusion of “Intelligent Design” curriculum alongside other explanations of the earth’s origin. One Christian creationist is opening creation a museum replete with explanations of dinosaurs and where they place those creatures on the timeline. Churches bring in creation scientists to hear detailed explanations of the Genesis account. Dozens of ministries have been birthed for the single purpose of fighting evolution and equipping Christians with talking points to use for sparring with their evolution minded friends.
Then there’s Noah’s ark. Christian scientists have built elaborate theories around exactly how Noah fit all those animals on the ark. They explain that the ark didn’t have to go anywhere. It just had to float. Many of the animals must have been babies. That explains one of the ways that Noah fit so many of them in such a small space. Oh, and don’t forget hibernation. Hibernation cuts down on the animal waste problem. All of these space saving measures are purely speculative. The text doesn’t answer all the questions for us. So, if we want to know the details, we have to theorize and speculate.
How do we explain a global flood? Some Christian scientists claim they can explain that. They put forth the “canopy theory.” The earth had complete cloud cover. This changed the sun’s impact on the earth. Thus we had different vegetation and the sun had different impact on man. That, some say, explains people being able to live for hundreds of years.
So what we have is modern science gradually coming up with evidence that seems to disprove the Bible. Then, Christian scientists explain why they are wrong. Sometimes the Christian explanation sounds reasonable. Sometimes, it sounds speculative. In fact, it sounds every bit as speculative as they accuse Darwinians of being.
Here’s the slippery problem with seeking scientific explanations to legitimize Bible stories. We eventually reach an impasse. We have to use the “M” word. Miracle. The explanations for creation and Noah’s Ark are one thing. What do we do when we get to the parting of the Red Sea? I believe that Moses literally parted the Red Sea and led the Israelites across it. However, I’m not going to look for a meteorological explanation. The infallible Word of God tells me that it happened.
How about the virgin birth? How about Jesus turning water into wine? Raising Lazarus from the dead? Walking on water? Even Peter walked on water for a little bit we know. How did these happen? We have to just say… miracle. That’s it. Science says they couldn’t have happened. We (Christians) have to just have faith that they did. We don’t require scientific proof of these events.
I appreciate the spirit with which these Christian scientists labor. No one wants to have science brand a big “Disproved” stamp across our entire Bible. However, this is a battle I believe that science will appear to win. Jesus ultimately won the war with His death on the cross.
I believe the Bible to be the inerrant infallible Word of God. I don’t need any further proof. Just as God opened Lydia’s heart to understand what Paul was saying, I believe that God’s Holy Spirit has opened my heart to believe the Bible’s claims. As we seek “proof” we’d be wise to remember Jesus’ words to Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
I confess that I often find myself trying to keep score in the battle between secular science and Biblical creationists. Biblical creationists in recent years have grown more and more aggressive and creative in their tactics for combating Darwinian Evolution. There are the state-by-state and district-by-district battles for inclusion of “Intelligent Design” curriculum alongside other explanations of the earth’s origin. One Christian creationist is opening creation a museum replete with explanations of dinosaurs and where they place those creatures on the timeline. Churches bring in creation scientists to hear detailed explanations of the Genesis account. Dozens of ministries have been birthed for the single purpose of fighting evolution and equipping Christians with talking points to use for sparring with their evolution minded friends.
Then there’s Noah’s ark. Christian scientists have built elaborate theories around exactly how Noah fit all those animals on the ark. They explain that the ark didn’t have to go anywhere. It just had to float. Many of the animals must have been babies. That explains one of the ways that Noah fit so many of them in such a small space. Oh, and don’t forget hibernation. Hibernation cuts down on the animal waste problem. All of these space saving measures are purely speculative. The text doesn’t answer all the questions for us. So, if we want to know the details, we have to theorize and speculate.
How do we explain a global flood? Some Christian scientists claim they can explain that. They put forth the “canopy theory.” The earth had complete cloud cover. This changed the sun’s impact on the earth. Thus we had different vegetation and the sun had different impact on man. That, some say, explains people being able to live for hundreds of years.
So what we have is modern science gradually coming up with evidence that seems to disprove the Bible. Then, Christian scientists explain why they are wrong. Sometimes the Christian explanation sounds reasonable. Sometimes, it sounds speculative. In fact, it sounds every bit as speculative as they accuse Darwinians of being.
Here’s the slippery problem with seeking scientific explanations to legitimize Bible stories. We eventually reach an impasse. We have to use the “M” word. Miracle. The explanations for creation and Noah’s Ark are one thing. What do we do when we get to the parting of the Red Sea? I believe that Moses literally parted the Red Sea and led the Israelites across it. However, I’m not going to look for a meteorological explanation. The infallible Word of God tells me that it happened.
How about the virgin birth? How about Jesus turning water into wine? Raising Lazarus from the dead? Walking on water? Even Peter walked on water for a little bit we know. How did these happen? We have to just say… miracle. That’s it. Science says they couldn’t have happened. We (Christians) have to just have faith that they did. We don’t require scientific proof of these events.
I appreciate the spirit with which these Christian scientists labor. No one wants to have science brand a big “Disproved” stamp across our entire Bible. However, this is a battle I believe that science will appear to win. Jesus ultimately won the war with His death on the cross.
I believe the Bible to be the inerrant infallible Word of God. I don’t need any further proof. Just as God opened Lydia’s heart to understand what Paul was saying, I believe that God’s Holy Spirit has opened my heart to believe the Bible’s claims. As we seek “proof” we’d be wise to remember Jesus’ words to Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
The Doctrine of Biological Infallibility
I discussed yesterday how Oprah encourages us to “live our own truth.” This is the Oprah mantra. “Don’t hide your secrets,” she exhorts us. “Live your own truth!”
Cue the applause.
Soccer moms begin their nodding.
The ratings rise.
This is one facet of the gospel of self.
On Tuesday’s show Oprah was interviewing married women that discovered after their wedding vows that they were actually gay. So, as I discussed yesterday, the thrust of the program was the bravery of these women and the difficulty of their struggle. Oprah and the audience had a lot of congratulatory applause for these brave women.
For Oprah, biology is destiny. These women found themselves attracted to people of the same gender. So, that must be their natural inclination. And, if that’s what their loins crave, it must be right. They must be born that way. After all, that’s “their truth.” They need to live it with courage and boldness. Supporters of same sex lifestyles always point out that no one would choose to be gay. It’s too tough a road to choose on your own. It’s a road fraught with persecution and social stigma. Therefore, it must be our natural inclination.
However, what do we do with other biological desires? The man who burns in his loins for children or for animals? What if he feels equally strong about his desires? Can he act on them? Should he? After all, talk about a tough road to choose. Who would choose to be a pedophile? I would guess that that’s a road fraught with stigmatization. Would anyone choose it?
Does Oprah encourage him to live his truth? If not. Why not?
Suddenly her doctrine of the infallibility of biological desires breaks down. She’s not prepared to say that he should act on that desire. And, she’s right. He shouldn’t. The problem is Oprah has to come up with an explanation for why he feels that way. Remember, her default answer is “live your own truth.” So, she’s got to come up with a way to explain why this guy has a “bad truth.” After all, aren’t our loins the guide? What if he feels like he’s listening to his heart?
Herein lies the problem with the Oprah worldview: She (and we) can’t hold it consistently. She’s got to come up with a way to approve of what she likes and explain away what she doesn’t. How does she do it?
Here’s how she explains the pedophile’s reprehensible behavior. He was wounded that way. Someone or something busted his internal compass. That’s what knocked his compass askew. In the world of Oprahvity people are born with pure desires and if they go bad it’s because some external force pushed them off course.
The Christian worldview is that we’re all born depraved. Like a car that is out of alignment, our tendency is to desire things that are wrong. A desire that comes from within is not always right. Because our internal compass is busted, we must navigate from something other than our “heart.”
Look at what the bible says in Jeremiah 17:9. “The heart is deceitfully wicked, who can know it.”
Living our own truth is actually a very dangerous thing.
Cue the applause.
Soccer moms begin their nodding.
The ratings rise.
This is one facet of the gospel of self.
On Tuesday’s show Oprah was interviewing married women that discovered after their wedding vows that they were actually gay. So, as I discussed yesterday, the thrust of the program was the bravery of these women and the difficulty of their struggle. Oprah and the audience had a lot of congratulatory applause for these brave women.
For Oprah, biology is destiny. These women found themselves attracted to people of the same gender. So, that must be their natural inclination. And, if that’s what their loins crave, it must be right. They must be born that way. After all, that’s “their truth.” They need to live it with courage and boldness. Supporters of same sex lifestyles always point out that no one would choose to be gay. It’s too tough a road to choose on your own. It’s a road fraught with persecution and social stigma. Therefore, it must be our natural inclination.
However, what do we do with other biological desires? The man who burns in his loins for children or for animals? What if he feels equally strong about his desires? Can he act on them? Should he? After all, talk about a tough road to choose. Who would choose to be a pedophile? I would guess that that’s a road fraught with stigmatization. Would anyone choose it?
Does Oprah encourage him to live his truth? If not. Why not?
Suddenly her doctrine of the infallibility of biological desires breaks down. She’s not prepared to say that he should act on that desire. And, she’s right. He shouldn’t. The problem is Oprah has to come up with an explanation for why he feels that way. Remember, her default answer is “live your own truth.” So, she’s got to come up with a way to explain why this guy has a “bad truth.” After all, aren’t our loins the guide? What if he feels like he’s listening to his heart?
Herein lies the problem with the Oprah worldview: She (and we) can’t hold it consistently. She’s got to come up with a way to approve of what she likes and explain away what she doesn’t. How does she do it?
Here’s how she explains the pedophile’s reprehensible behavior. He was wounded that way. Someone or something busted his internal compass. That’s what knocked his compass askew. In the world of Oprahvity people are born with pure desires and if they go bad it’s because some external force pushed them off course.
The Christian worldview is that we’re all born depraved. Like a car that is out of alignment, our tendency is to desire things that are wrong. A desire that comes from within is not always right. Because our internal compass is busted, we must navigate from something other than our “heart.”
Look at what the bible says in Jeremiah 17:9. “The heart is deceitfully wicked, who can know it.”
Living our own truth is actually a very dangerous thing.
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Endless Navel Gazing
I'm flipping channels today and I landed on Oprah. That was my first mistake. I shouldn’t watch Oprah. I’m pretty sure that if I had an anger management counselor, he'd probably tell me that I should quit watching Oprah.
Anyway, on today’s episode the Right Reverend Oprah was treating her live studio audience and everyone at home in TV Land to a shocking new trend. Today’s episode was about wives in heterosexual marriages that realize that they are gay. These women sit on the Oprah couch and share their “brave struggle.”
Oprah furrows her brow.
The audience nods in agreement.
Oprah asks probing questions.
The guests and sometimes their ex-husbands talk about their journey as they navigated through this tough struggle toward living a life of truthfulness.
More brow furrowing.
More nodding.
Sometimes there is some clapping from the audience. Not too much, this is a sensitive subject.
The audience grows more and more enamored with this woman’s “courage.” She’s so brave.
Oprah reads sad email from an unnamed woman who’s afraid to be as brave as the show’s other guests. She’s loves her husband. But, she’s not “in love” with him. So, she’ll probably die lonely and afraid to come out of the closet.
Oprah can’t take it anymore. It’s time for the closing homily. She exhorts the audience to “Live your own truth.”
You don’t have to watch Oprah very long to realize that “living your own truth” is her battle cry.
There’s a lot of talk these days about “getting in touch with your feelings”. Or learning how I’m “wired-together.” At the end of the day aren’t we all just trying to “get in touch” with who we are?
Self-discovery, self awareness, introspection, soul searching, self actualization. Those are just a few of the terms we hear used.
When did we start talking like this? Did your grandparents talk like that? I don’t think my grandfather ever encouraged me to get in touch with myself.
In the classic musical “The King and I” Rodgers and Hammerstein have a song with which most of us are familiar. It’s called “Getting to Know You.”
However, if the Oprah Winfrey Show was a musical that song’s lyrics might go like this:
Getting to know me,
Getting to know all about me.
Getting to like me,
Getting to hope I like me.
Getting to know me,
Putting it my way,
But nicely,
I am precisely,
My cup of tea.
In Christianity we’ve also crafted a term for “getting in touch with our true selves.” In fact, we say that you can’t come to a saving faith in Christ unless you’ve gotten in touch with who you really are deep down. We call it the Doctrine of Total Depravity. We’re sinners. Our body, mind and spirit are totally corrupt. That doesn’t mean that we are as bad as we could be. As R.C. Sproul points out: Even Hitler refrained from killing his own mother.
The Doctrine of Total Depravity states that every aspect of our nature has been compromised to one degree or another by our own sinful selfishness. We are depraved!
Welcome to my first blog. I thought at the onset, that I should teach you some terms that I’ll be using. Depravity is a term that I’m sure I’ll refer back to often. If you didn’t know what depravity meant you could look it up. However, some of the terms that I’ll use will be totally made up words. Today I’m introducing a term that is the opposite of Total Depravity. That term is Total Oprahvity.
Oprahvity is all about “living your own truth.”
Anyway, on today’s episode the Right Reverend Oprah was treating her live studio audience and everyone at home in TV Land to a shocking new trend. Today’s episode was about wives in heterosexual marriages that realize that they are gay. These women sit on the Oprah couch and share their “brave struggle.”
Oprah furrows her brow.
The audience nods in agreement.
Oprah asks probing questions.
The guests and sometimes their ex-husbands talk about their journey as they navigated through this tough struggle toward living a life of truthfulness.
More brow furrowing.
More nodding.
Sometimes there is some clapping from the audience. Not too much, this is a sensitive subject.
The audience grows more and more enamored with this woman’s “courage.” She’s so brave.
Oprah reads sad email from an unnamed woman who’s afraid to be as brave as the show’s other guests. She’s loves her husband. But, she’s not “in love” with him. So, she’ll probably die lonely and afraid to come out of the closet.
Oprah can’t take it anymore. It’s time for the closing homily. She exhorts the audience to “Live your own truth.”
You don’t have to watch Oprah very long to realize that “living your own truth” is her battle cry.
There’s a lot of talk these days about “getting in touch with your feelings”. Or learning how I’m “wired-together.” At the end of the day aren’t we all just trying to “get in touch” with who we are?
Self-discovery, self awareness, introspection, soul searching, self actualization. Those are just a few of the terms we hear used.
When did we start talking like this? Did your grandparents talk like that? I don’t think my grandfather ever encouraged me to get in touch with myself.
In the classic musical “The King and I” Rodgers and Hammerstein have a song with which most of us are familiar. It’s called “Getting to Know You.”
However, if the Oprah Winfrey Show was a musical that song’s lyrics might go like this:
Getting to know me,
Getting to know all about me.
Getting to like me,
Getting to hope I like me.
Getting to know me,
Putting it my way,
But nicely,
I am precisely,
My cup of tea.
In Christianity we’ve also crafted a term for “getting in touch with our true selves.” In fact, we say that you can’t come to a saving faith in Christ unless you’ve gotten in touch with who you really are deep down. We call it the Doctrine of Total Depravity. We’re sinners. Our body, mind and spirit are totally corrupt. That doesn’t mean that we are as bad as we could be. As R.C. Sproul points out: Even Hitler refrained from killing his own mother.
The Doctrine of Total Depravity states that every aspect of our nature has been compromised to one degree or another by our own sinful selfishness. We are depraved!
Welcome to my first blog. I thought at the onset, that I should teach you some terms that I’ll be using. Depravity is a term that I’m sure I’ll refer back to often. If you didn’t know what depravity meant you could look it up. However, some of the terms that I’ll use will be totally made up words. Today I’m introducing a term that is the opposite of Total Depravity. That term is Total Oprahvity.
Oprahvity is all about “living your own truth.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)