Knowledge of the Holy (2)

More thoughts from A. W Tozer's book, The Knowledge of the Holy:

“A right conception of God is basic not only to systematic theology but to practical Christian living as well. It is to worship what the foundation is to the temple; where it is inadequate or out of plumb the whole structure must sooner or later collapse.” (2)

Again Tozer draws a strong connection between doctrine and life. Across the landscape of Christianity today there is continental drift between life and doctrine with an ocean growing in between. The “life” side is highlighted, the “doctrine” side is painted as irrelevant. The result is a whole collection of things that the Bible has to say fall under the blacklisted heading of “theology and doctrine,” and the Christian is called elsewhere (toward good things and things found in the Bible, to be sure, but toward a vision of Christianity that is absent of things which smack of esoteric, heady knowledge, which theologians debate over but which seemingly have little implication for day to day life). “Systematics” is a dirty word. Tozer is drawing a bigger circle around the word theology than simply what is in the category of “systematics.” A “right conception of God,” he says, is the ground we stand on. It is silly to remove things which actually are pillars in that right conception of God and expect remain standing. It is not healthy, in the long run, to draw a distinction between life and doctrine. This is true even if the alternate picture of the Christian life is simply holding to “basic Christianity” or “just loving Jesus”. “Loving Jesus” is a wonderful thing, but it must be understood that loving Jesus is like standing on a point. From that point there are 360 degrees worth of directions to move and how a person moves from that point is solely and only determined by his or her conception of God, his or her theology. There is no standing still – even inaction is an action dictated by a conception of God. We must move and must make choices driven by doctrine - I want to make this point carefully. We are already committed! The real question is not one of standing still and just loving Jesus, the real question is when you move from the spot, is the direction you move in determined by as full a picture of God as the Bible contains? If all things that fall under the heading of systematics/theology/doctrine are jettisoned in the mind of the believer, the answer to that question is probably no.

Knowledge of the Holy (1)

This morning I was re-reading a wonderful chapter from A. W. Tozer’s book, Knowledge of the Holy, and wanted to post some quotes from the chapter as well as thoughts about them.

“What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us… That our idea of God correspond as nearly as possible to the true being of God is of immense importance to us.” (p. 1,2)
Tozer makes a connection that is rapidly dissolving in the minds of some Church people today; the connection between theology and life. This connection is a sword with two edges, cutting in the direction of two errors we make in our thinking about theology. On the one hand is the danger of thinking that head knowledge is the whole of the Christian life, without that knowledge ever really “becoming true” of us. Tozer undercuts that mistake by insisting that the nature of our picture of God is such that it has a direct and immediate call on our actions/values/thoughts in our actual day-to-day lives. If the connection isn’t flowing that direction it is possible that you haven’t actually begun to worship the real God; it is the most important thing because an encounter with the real God does not leave us the same as it found us. Tozer speaks to the opposite error as well. If you listen, you'll hear both errors in the air today, but this one seems to gaining popularity. It is the idea that theology is esoteric. We must preserve the idea that theology means not less than simply “what we think about God”. The Christian life is like finding pieces of the picture of God and putting them in their right places, like a mosaic. Tozer is saying that this mosaic – what it holds and what it does not hold – is life and death. Everything flows out of that mosaic (and not just in some “spiritual” realm of life, but in all of life). If those are the stakes, then every piece matters. There is a not a category for “accessories” when it comes to theology. Everything matters.

“We tend by a secret law of the heart to move toward our mental image of God. This is true not only of the individual Christian, but of the company of Christians that composes the Church. Always the most revealing things about the Church is her idea of God, just as her most significant message is what she says about him or leaves unsaid, for her silence is often more eloquent that her speech. She can never escape the self-disclosure of her witness concerning God.” (p. 1) Christians, as a body of the Church and as individuals, are continually bearing witness, both intentionally and accidentally. It cannot be stopped. This is a very comforting thing and a very challenging thing. It is comforting because it seems, at least for me, to take weight off of the enormity of the calling before the Church, as it shifts the focus from “go and DO” to simply go and BE”. If the Church is there is cannot hide its witness; it just needs to be what God made it to be, to love God, worship him with its life, to enjoy him, to love and care for what he has made. This being speaks with a loud voice, often louder than any words. But if Tozer eases the burden in one place he underscores its weight in another. He says the Church is responsible not only for what it is, but what it is not. The task before the Church is to love what God loves as a reflection of his character, and what the Church fails to be, it proclaims that God also is not. That’s a sobering reality, and what human community is equal to the task of embodying an infinite, holy God? But that is the calling nonetheless, and that is the lens we should examine ourselves with.

Not The Way It's Supposed To Be

Death is an awful thing.

I'm a pet person, always have been. I love the companionship provided by a cat or a dog. To that end, my wife and I (she shares my pet affinity) got a kitten a few years ago. Lucy, our petite calico has brought much joy to our lives. But where one is good, two is better, right? So, six weeks ago we got another, an eight week old grey tabby. We named him Kramer. This morning, Kramer died while being neutered.

Let me be perfectly clear, there are people in our church and possibly even reading this blog, who have lost a parent, a relative, or a close friend in the past few months. I loved that cat, but his death in no way compares to the pain and loss others are feeling.

But the principle is the same. The pain we feel when we experience death in our lives should remind us that it shouldn't be this way. We were originally created to live eternally with God, we weren't supposed to die. The sin of Adam, the sin that we actively participate in has corrupted and polluted this world, and death is part of that curse.

Cornelius Plantinga, Jr. has written a book entitled, Not the Way It's Supposed to Be: A Breviary of Sin. This highly recommended work changed the whole way I look at sin. It's not just something I do, it isn't just independent acts. It wreaks havoc in my life and in this world. Because of it, because of me, life isn't the way it's supposed to be.

Through sin, death entered this world. And thus, today, my heart is a little heavy. But instead of feeling sorry for myself, I'm trying something different. I'm going to be angry at Satan, I'm going to be angry at my sin. Because that's the rabbit hole through which death and pain entered. And it's not supposed to be like this.

Cohen on "The Ends of Science"

It’s by no means a stretch to suggest that the relationship between science and faith is a topic of significant interest among Christians. For example, this very blog has seen a fair amount of discussion regarding the topic. Additionally, the question regarding scientific evidence for Christianity that Dave will be addressing this Sunday actually received the most votes in our online poll earlier this spring. And when one scans newspapers and magazines, it’s not at all uncommon to find articles dealing with the subject.

With that in mind, I thought I’d pass along a particularly engaging piece by Eric Cohen entitled "The Ends of Science." I found it to be a thoughtful examination of the modern scientific enterprise, including its nature and limits (my thanks to David Clark for pointing it out to me). Here are a couple of excerpts:

In every area of public life where science and morality intersect, there are questions about the use of science that science itself can never answer. On stem cells, scientists can tell us the potential benefits of destroying human embryos but not whether the progress of medicine justifies the willful destruction of nascent human life. On drilling in Alaska, scientists can estimate the potential oil reserves and the potential harm to the ecosystem but not whether we have a moral responsibility to expand the domestic oil supply or to preserve an unsullied wilderness even with economic harm to ourselves. On human exploration of space, scientists can estimate the economic and human costs of putting a man on Mars and the potential benefits of such a mission to the advance of human knowledge, but they cannot say whether human greatness in space is more worthy of public funds than ongoing research into curing AIDS. Science is power without wisdom about the uses of power. As Hans Jonas put it: “The scientist himself is by his science no more qualified than others to discern, nor is he more disposed to care for, the good of mankind. Benevolence must be called in from the outside to supplement the knowledge acquired through theory: it does not flow from theory itself.”
……….

Despite its inherent limits and frequent excesses, there is great dignity in the scientific vocation rightly understood—the dignity of confronting nature’s facts in all their beauty and ugliness, and the dignity of seeking to make human life a little less miserable. Science is, or can be, a noble vocation, a realm of human endeavor that invites human excellence, including moral excellence. Against the sin of despair, the scientist stands for action. Against the postmodern revolt against reality, the scientist seeks truth. Thrown into a world that is mysterious, the scientist seeks to bring into light what is so often shrouded in darkness.

The trouble is that most scientists—at least most modern biologists, whose work dominates the public imagination about science—do not seem to reflect much or deeply about the limits of their method, or about the moral significance of the ends they seek and the means they use. The recent book by human genome pioneer Francis Collins—a memoir of faith that might have been titled C.S. Lewis Goes to the Laboratory-is notable precisely because it is such a striking exception to the norm. In the public realm, most biologists seem, all too often, like scientific geniuses and moral simpletons, applying rational rigor to their investigations of nature but relying on feeling as their only moral compass. And for all its appreciation of nature’s complexity, the scientific mind seems no rival for the Bible or Aristotle or Machiavelli in understanding human complexity. Next to the philosopher, the neuroscientist still looks, all too often, like a fool.

The scientist is especially foolish when he is optimistic without a dose of tragic reservation. For, despite Condorcet’s claims, science is perhaps most necessary precisely because of the permanence of human sin and human evil, not because scientific progress will be the tool of their eradication.

What Attracts People To Christianity?

Several of us on staff at The Crossing are reading an interesting book entitled unchristian. Others have posted on it and I'm sure that you will hear more about it in the future. You can't read the book without thinking about how Christians and the church are viewed by those who don't share the same beliefs. I came across this article on the same subject on the Pearcey Report and thought it might make you think.

Here's a news flash for all the so-called culture warriors who tend to preach to the choir with amazing frequency, intensity, and duration: STOP. Stop the apocalyptic email blasts. Stop the delusional comparisons of yourselves to our Founding Fathers. Hold the wine and cheesiness, and please pass the credibility.

Americans have come to think that Christians are, well, goofballs. Our fellow Americans would rather elect a freshman radical than an evangelical sympathizer to the presidency.

My GenX friends are actually more afraid of the theatrics of televangelists than the cultural threat of sexual anarchy. These misplaced apprehensions are widespread and dangerous.

The culture war is lost unless people begin to trust Christians more than secularists, atheists, communists, and radical liberals. To gain this social trust, I propose that Christians everywhere submit themselves to the Christian Credibility Creed.

In addition to the other creeds of Christianity:

I believe that dressing up and talking like Paul Revere does not make me a modern day patriot or member of the second Black Regiment. A postmodern revolution will look different from past revolutions.

I believe that always looking for miracles and material signs of God’s favor makes me shallow and less involved in the supernatural.

I believe that inserting God-talk clichés into everyday conversations with (or overheard by) non-Christians hurts the work of the Holy Spirit.

I believe that anyone making an above-average income “in the ministry” is a devil.

I believe that Christianity should be the chosen religion of every person on the planet, but not the official religion of the United States.

I believe that the obsessive, unhappy, mainline pastors are just as bad as the obsessive, overly-happy, evangelical pastors.

I believe that Christian music, art, and movies that do not compete technically with the mainstream fare are an affront to the Creative Director of the Universe.

I believe that I should know Scripture, theology, and Christian philosophy better than atheist propagandists.

I believe that missions trips should be undertaken for the benefit of the hurting, lonely, and lost -- not for the psychological or social benefit of Christians.

I believe that “speaking the Truth in love” requires fewer words not more.

I believe that what I really believe is really real and I act accordingly (thanks to Focus on the Family’s "Truth Project" for that one).

I imagine that if Christian leaders got behind this effort instead of their efforts to reform everyone else, the culture war would take an overnight turn in favor of the Truth. I dare us all to try it.

Batman: The Dark Knight

Along with millions of other Americans, I caught a Friday showing of The Dark Knight. I’ve actually been a fan of comic books and super-heroes ever since I can remember, so I was eager to see the follow-up for what in my mind is one of the best comic adaptations to the big screen ever (my top three in no particular order: Spiderman 2, Iron Man, and Batman Begins).

The film didn’t disappoint, largely living up to the considerable media praise its received. It sports fine acting performances all around, from Heath Ledger’s disturbingly vivid turn as Batman’s arch-nemesis, the Joker, to Gary Oldman’s subtly strong Lt. Jim Gordon. And I’d agree with those who’ve suggested that while the film certainly has its fair share of summer blockbuster elements, it stands as much more than mindless popcorn entertainment. Driven by director Christopher Nolan’s compelling vision, the film’s tone is dark, gritty, and unsettling in more than a few places, a fact that nonetheless helps to lend this current incarnation of the Batman mythos more realism and undoubtedly more lasting value.* Yes, this is the rare summer movie fare that gives its viewer much to chew on.

With that in mind, here are a few questions to ponder after viewing The Dark Knight:

1. What about the film’s artistic execution (acting, directing, music, lighting, plot, special effects, etc.) did you particularly appreciate. Why?
2. Batman himself is vigilante. Why might this path be problematic? How does this manifest itself in the movie?
3. What is this film’s view of human nature? How does it compare with a biblical worldview?
4. How is the Joker’s evil differentiated from that of the other criminal elements in the story? How is it similar? How does this relate to a biblical perspective concerning sin?
5. How does the movie contrast Batman with Harvey Dent? With the Joker? What is the effect of these juxtapositions? What other themes are communicated by the Dent storyline?
6. In what ways is this story a tragedy? Why are these tragic elements compelling?

Feel free to raise your own questions and/or comment on the above.


*The film's tone should, however, give many parents pause in deciding whether or not to allow their children to see it.

Information Sabbath

I have been thinking about Ryan's message from a week ago: No Sabbath for the Weary? There are a few "top contenders" in my life that are always vying for my time. Obviously my wife, friends and job are all in the running. But another top contender that I have noticed more and more recently is simply being connected - being in-the-know, being up to date on the latest news, opinions, politics, movie reviews, books, websites, blogs, tech gadgets, music, etc. My laptop is always open, my email is always beeping, my cell phone is like a third hand - always connected to my body.

Maybe you can relate?

Tim Challies runs a blog at Challies.com and put up a very relevant post recently, Data Smog and the Christian Life. He ends the post with this paragraph:

Some days I thank God for the vast amount of information at my disposal. Other days I just wish it would all go away. In my more rational moments I know that this is impossible - the information is going to increase, not decrease. Therefore I am responsible before God to live a spiritually disciplined life in spite of this information overload. I am responsible before Him to carve time out of this information influx so I can just be alone with Him; alone with no telephone, no email, no internet. It is critical to my spiritual well-being that I find ways of removing and properly managing these distractions that keep me from spending the time He and I need to build a thriving, growing relationship.

I would encourage you to read the whole thing. I would also encourage you, if you are like me (and you probably are if you are reading this blog), to intentionally carve out times of rest from the onslaught of information that is constantly available to you. Find hours of your day that you can claim as Information Sabbaths; find hours that you can rest well for the purpose of growing in your love of Christ.

God is not Dead

My degree from MU is in Philosophy. When I was studying during undergrad, one of the most common questions I heard from concerned Christians was: "Isn't it hard to be a Christian in that environment? It cant be easy for you to grow in your faith in such an anti-Christian discipline."

I understood their concern. The assumption that Christianity is marginalized or even actively attacked in many academic disciplines is, unfortunately, often justified. However, the glaring contradiction to that rule is the one discipline most people assume is the worst: Philosophy.

William Craig, a Philosophy professor at Talbot School of Theology, wrote a piece in the most recent edition of Christianity Today titled 'God is not Dead' explaining this very point. He quotes another philosopher, Quentin Smith:

"God is not 'dead' in academia; he returned to life in the late 1960s and is now alive and well in his last academic stronghold, philosophy departments."

Craig goes on to write:

Accompanying [the] resurgence of interest in traditional philosophical questions [in the 1960's] came something altogether unanticipated: a renaissance of Christian philosophy...

Atheism, though perhaps still the dominant viewpoint at the American university, is a philosophy in retreat.

In the article, Craig outlines some of the major philosophical arguments for the existence of God that are still very much alive in modern philosophical discussion. He describes very well the experience I had while studying philosophy: Christianity not only has an "equal seat at the table," but because of the excellent work done by Christian philosophers around the world, it is one of the most respected philosophical systems today.

I would urge you to read Craig's artical when you have a spare minute.

Tony Snow 1955-2008

Tony Snow, a conservative political columnist and White House Press Secretary for Bush, died early Saturday morning.
Here is the full text of the article I read from during yesterday's sermon: Cancer's Unexpected Blessings, published in Christianity Today. It is well worth reading in its entirety.

Athletes and God

For those of you who are interested in the intersection between God and sports, CBS Sportsline columnist Greg Doyle recently opined on the subject of inconsistency between the words and lives of athletes confessing a Christian faith. The article is worth reading if for no other reason than to drive home the point that such discrepancies don't go unnoticed. In fact, they're potentially quite damaging to the cause of Christ.

Of course, that's something that's an issue not only for athletes, but for all of us. Jesus didn't command, "Live in such a way that cast doubt on the sincerity of your of faith." Instead, he charged, "Let your light so shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven" (Mat. 5:16).

How much we all need God's grace to transform our lives so they increasingly reflect the glory Christ and the truth of the gospel. The world, after all, is watching...