Culture, discernment, evangelism, Jesus, repentance

Crucifying What I Can’t Afford

jesus_cross_crucifixion.jpgThe Bible says that I am to “by the Spirit put to death the deeds of the flesh” (Romans 8:13b) so that I may live. I used to think that that was just the things that are “sinful”, meaning all the negative rules that people consider to be part of the Christian religion…. you know, don’t lie, don’t cheat, etc. etc.. I’m not so sure anymore.The fact is that I am supposed to be living a life that is focussed on God. God really is worth all the effort, but it’s often easier to focus on immediate pleasures; ones Religious people often think are sinful (like sex, drugs, etc.) and some that they think are okay (reading, thinking, playing games) and things that are in the grey area (movies, video games, music etc,).

It seems that in Romans 8 though, Paul has a different idea entirely. We are alive to the Spirit and dead to the flesh. This isn’t a wacky desire to have ecstatic Spiritual giftings, but rather a desire to live towards the one the Spirit testifies to, Jesus Christ. It’s a fairly simple thing, when I spend time on something, is it trying to gratify my desire for more of Jesus, or is it something that is simply making my flesh a little happier? One is a good idea, the other is a bad idea, but in practice they might look like the same act.

For example, I write this blog so that hopefully a gorgeous redhead or blonde supermodel Christian will happen upon this blog and fall in love with me: bad idea. I write this blog in the hope of making people love Jesus more: good idea (even if there’s a side effect of someone falling in love with me and us going on to glorify Jesus in a married life). Different goals, same act, but if the goal is wrong it’s a deed of the flesh. If the deed springs from a love of something other than Jesus, it needs to be crucified, it’s distracting from the real goal. I can’t afford it.

Getting more of Jesus in my life, making my life reflect more of Christ, and making others actually think Jesus is really awesome, is going to take everything I’ve got (and judging by some who read this blog, I have an uphill battle). doing good stuff for any reason other than that means I have less with which to seek Jesus, so I can’t afford it.

Standard
Culture, discernment, Journalism, Pastoring, Science, theology

Online Reading (January 29, 2008)

Religion and Science: Pope Benedict again wades into the debate.

Faith and Brains: (from 2 weeks ago) John Stackhouse publishes an impatient response to the questions about education and faith.

Newfoundland and…. Poland?: The local paper of record makes very superficial links between Poland and Newfoundland. Gee, maybe I should apply for a reporting job. I can ignore substantive cultural differences too!!!!

Christian Teaching: Tim Challies has a good piece on seeking good teachers as Christians.

Standard
Adoption, Culture, discernment, Ecumenism, Environmentalism, Ethics, Islam, Jesus, Postmodernism, theology

Online Reading (December 11, 2007)

Manners: A brilliant article by Mark Steyn on rudeness and the what it says about society.

Environment: An Australian professor believes that there should be a tax on having excess children, to better help the planet.

Canada: A young Muslim woman in Canada is murdered, and her father is in custody. There seems to have been a disagreement about her not wearing hijab to school.

Epistemology: A thumping good article on Christian worldview is posted at The Gospel Coalition.

 Anger: Okay, I know that stories in the paper aren’t to be believed at face value. But if you read this story without getting angry, you are a far more gentle person than I.

Standard
Culture, discernment, Rant, theology

A Loser in my Eyes

area-photo-r.jpgOne of the side effects of a public health care system such as the one in Canada is that every hospital is honestly a study in class dynamics. I notice this as I cut through the local hospital on my way home from the university (something I often do so that I can avail myself of the Tim Horton’s in the cafeteria). I am faced nboth with the poorest of our society, and the very apex of culture, the high priest of our religio-scientific denial of mortality: the doctor.

As I was walking through today though, I noticed in myself two completely distinct views of people. It was so drastic that I almost wondered if I had caught some kind of multiple personality disorder on my way past the psych ward (not a possibility, BTW, such illnesses are not caught by casual contact).

As I first passed people who were not of my socio-economic class (an upper middle-class educated white male), I found myself thinking “what a loser”. Yet after thinking a little on a text I’m preaching on this Sunday (Phil 2:5-11, I found myself noting the (for lack of a better word) beauty of the people around me who I had put down as losers mere moments earlier.

What had happened? I think philosophers get a little bit towards the truth when they note (as Kant does) that our understanding of reality is mitigated through our own conditions of possible experience, and thus are limited in scope. Or when psychologists note that our expectations of of sense experience actually alter the sense experience we have.

I also note that there is truth about the people that I see. In some sense they’re all beautiful (though not in the same ways). These are not simply subjective concepts in my mind, but actual facts about them that I see depending on the glasses I use to see them.

So how did a passage about the value of Jesus, his humility, and his glorifcation alter my perspective?  It was quite simple. The loser I saw in the others was in my own eyes.

When I forget God, even for a moment, I am prone to actually place someone else in the throne of godhood. Most notably, me.  When I do that, other people become threats to that god, their value, even if it actually is in them, become heretical possible usurpers, something that can cast down the god of my own value. They have beauty in different ways that I do not have, and I cannot countenance that, so in my own eyes, I deride them as “losers”.

This is not to say that people are all the same in beauty (they aren’t, we’re all differently beautiful), or that all decisions people make are beneficial to them and society (they aren’t). but that fundamentally they are valuable, and are all giftd by God to fulfill roles in the world around us.

When I call them losers, though, I am actually speaking about their value over all, and not on their choices, sins, beauties or gifts. In that point, I am protecting my god of me. Quite literally, the loser that I see them to be is “in my eyes”.

But then Christ enters view. Both humble and glorious he casts down the god of me, and replaces it with himself. The result is that I gain an attitude of humility as I place Christ where he should be (on a throne where even my knee will bow, and my tongue will confess that he is Lord to the glory of God the father), and then forget my own godhood.

The result is drastic. Seeing Jesus as glorious means that the beauty of others, or even myself, is no l;onger an attack on my God. They will never compare to Jesus in that way, and in fact by their beauty and gifts reaffirm the value and beauty of Christ. As such, I can see them as they are; not by venerating myself as god, or even by venerating them, or society, or humanity  generally, but by simply seeing them as they are. Beautiful creations of a loving and just God.

Humility, and love of others, is based in the glory of God. Indeed, so is seeing the truth of people. It is not what’s in my eyes that is true. It’s who’s in my heart. jesus2.jpg

Standard
discernment, Rant, repentance

Mea Culpa

As anybody reading this has noticed, I’ve taken a week off of writing here for some reason or other. At the beginning of the break, I didn’t know why I was doing it, only that I should.

In that time I’ve spent some time looking into my own motivations for things, which could easilly be considered navel gazing, save that I think I may have been going a very wrong direction in my posts and in my argumentation. Now, this doesn’t mean I’ve come to believe that atheism or the lack of spiritual discipline in the Churches is any less incorrect, or that my opposition to them was wrong.

The problem was more one of why I was  writing. Namely, to show off my own intellect and ability rather than talk about the Glory of God in Jesus Christ in all of this. I was happy to play language and rhetoric games rather than actually get around to talking about why Jesus is so valuable, and so compelling even to a semi-educated guy in the early 21st century.

My posts of late, as I read them, drip more of bitterness and self righteousness than speaking of the beauty of what God has done through Jesus. I was happy to tell the bad news, without telling the good news.

I hope that you, the few readers that remain, will forgive me for that.

I pray that in the future, even as I comment about the negatives in the world, that I will tell you even more about the great hope I have despite all of that. I believe that in all the suffering and negatives around, God is working a glorious redemption in those who will just accept him, and believe on him rather than just his gifts. That, contrary to what we see, there will be a glorious ending in which all these things will culminate in something good, and that none of our suffering will be wasted.

Soli Deo Gloria

Standard