Friday, July 28, 2006
Best bone of my body
I’m still working my way through “John Ploughman’s Talk” by Charles H. Spurgeon. In his chapter on “A Good Word for Wives” I found he had described my wife Sharon. Spurgeon writes, “A true wife is her husband’s better half…his flower of beauty…and his heart’s treasure. He says to her, ‘I shall in thee most happy be. In thee, my choice, I do rejoice. In thee I find contentment of mind. God’s appointment is my contentment.’ In her company he finds his earthly heaven; she is the light of his home; the comfort of his soul, and (for this world) the soul of his comfort. Whatever his fortune may send him, he is rich so long as she lives. His rib is the best bone of his body.”
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Well It Ought to be a Right
I’m preaching on “The Providence of God” this weekend. As I spent time studying this doctrine within Scripture I found that my emotional reaction had very little to do with what is plainly taught in Scripture. It had everything to do with a feeling of loss of autonomy. I was reminded of a Calvin and Hobbes cartoon I saw recently. In the first frame, Calvin says, “I refuse to take out the garbage! I have the right to do whatever I want. All the time!” In the second frame his father replies, “No you don’t” To which Calvin responds, “I don’t?” In the last frame Calvin is seen dragging a large garbage bag across the floor while he grumbles, “Well it sure OUGHT to be a right.”
I think for most of us who follow Christ, this is the heart of our struggle with the sovereignty of God. We, like Calvin, want the right to do whatever we want. All the time.
I think for most of us who follow Christ, this is the heart of our struggle with the sovereignty of God. We, like Calvin, want the right to do whatever we want. All the time.
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Seriously
I read, on average, one book each week. I’m not bragging, it’s just part of who I am. I decided in January that I would read one book each month that was at least 50 years old. Currently I am reading a book by Charles H. Spurgeon entitled, "John Ploughman’s Talk." I have read Spurgeon quite a bit over the years, having been challenged by his sermons and encouraged and helped by his "Lectures to My Students." Until now I never knew he was funny.
(For example, in his chapter on “The Idle” he writes, “The ugliest sight in the world is one of those thorough-bred loafers, who would hardly hold up his basin if it were to rain porridge; and for certain would never hold up a bigger pot than he wanted to fill for himself. Perhaps, if the shower should turn to beer, he make wake himself up a bit; but he would make up for it afterwards” Later he writes, "Nobody is more like an honest man than a thorough rogue.")
In the preface to John Ploughman’s Talk he writes, “That I have written in a semi-humourous vein needs no apology… There is no particular virtue in being seriously unreadable.”
I’ve been thinking about that last statement in light of one of my personal rules to live by, “Take God more seriously and yourself less seriously.” It’s always good to find people who agree with you who have excellent reputations and whose writings have stood the test of time.
(For example, in his chapter on “The Idle” he writes, “The ugliest sight in the world is one of those thorough-bred loafers, who would hardly hold up his basin if it were to rain porridge; and for certain would never hold up a bigger pot than he wanted to fill for himself. Perhaps, if the shower should turn to beer, he make wake himself up a bit; but he would make up for it afterwards” Later he writes, "Nobody is more like an honest man than a thorough rogue.")
In the preface to John Ploughman’s Talk he writes, “That I have written in a semi-humourous vein needs no apology… There is no particular virtue in being seriously unreadable.”
I’ve been thinking about that last statement in light of one of my personal rules to live by, “Take God more seriously and yourself less seriously.” It’s always good to find people who agree with you who have excellent reputations and whose writings have stood the test of time.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
A Language More Adequate
As part of my summer series I will soon be preaching on three great New Testament words related to salvation: Justification, Redemption and Propitiation. Justification is what God does for us on the basis of placing our sins on Jesus and judging them there. Because the requirement of God’s righteous law is satisfied in Christ’s sacrifice, God is free to declare us justified, or “not guilty” under the Law. Redemption is what Christ does for us by dying our place. We are redeemed (bought back) from our slavery to sin and set free to be in relationship with God. Propitiation is what Christ does in relationship to God. Jesus satisfies God’s demand for restitution for the broken relationship. God is completely satisfied with Christ’s sacrifice as payment in full and having been satisfied, we can now be reconciled, that is, made friends.
As I have been preparing I must admit a tendency to focus on the technicalities of these three very crucial words. I have defined them, illustrated them and will be urging the congregation to participate in them. What I have failed to consider, until recently, is that they are not simply esoteric theological terms. They are not doctrines made up to try to create a system by which people can be reconciled to God. They are words used to describe something that took place in time and space. And all by God’s initiative. (God justifies the sinner. Christ redeems the sinner. Christ propitiates God. The sinner has no part in these actions. Read Romans 3:21-31.)
C.S. Lewis credits J.R.R. Tolkien and Hugo Dyson as being the human cause of his conversion to Christ by explaining to Lewis that these doctrines were not the heart of Christianity. They were, in fact, simply translations into words that which God had already expressed in “a language more adequate: namely the actual incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection” of Jesus. To put it another way, these words only have meaning because of what actually took place. They are not some philosopher or theologian’s attempt to describe a “legal fiction” that we can use to make ourselves right with God. These words only have meaning because of what Christ really did on a real cross to make it possible for people to be in relationship with God.
As I have been preparing I must admit a tendency to focus on the technicalities of these three very crucial words. I have defined them, illustrated them and will be urging the congregation to participate in them. What I have failed to consider, until recently, is that they are not simply esoteric theological terms. They are not doctrines made up to try to create a system by which people can be reconciled to God. They are words used to describe something that took place in time and space. And all by God’s initiative. (God justifies the sinner. Christ redeems the sinner. Christ propitiates God. The sinner has no part in these actions. Read Romans 3:21-31.)
C.S. Lewis credits J.R.R. Tolkien and Hugo Dyson as being the human cause of his conversion to Christ by explaining to Lewis that these doctrines were not the heart of Christianity. They were, in fact, simply translations into words that which God had already expressed in “a language more adequate: namely the actual incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection” of Jesus. To put it another way, these words only have meaning because of what actually took place. They are not some philosopher or theologian’s attempt to describe a “legal fiction” that we can use to make ourselves right with God. These words only have meaning because of what Christ really did on a real cross to make it possible for people to be in relationship with God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)