Saturday, March 18, 2006
U. S. Representative Curt Weldon of Pennsyvania told the Philadelphia Inquirer this week that Osama bin Laden died in Iran. Weldon is the one who brought out the story of "Able Danger" last year. That is the story U. S. military intelligence identified Mohamed Atta as a terrorist threat well before the 9/11 attacks.
Weldon claims to have a source from Iran that is the same one who served as a source for the Able Danger information.
I hope he is correct.
Weldon claims to have a source from Iran that is the same one who served as a source for the Able Danger information.
I hope he is correct.
Chuck Colson writes about the real Patrick of Ireland, for whom St. Patrick's day is named. It has nothing to do with shamrocks, wearing green or drinking green beer. Read it here.
Thursday, March 16, 2006
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
CHRISTIAN COUNTERCULTURE PART II. The second point made by the interviewees in the article on Christian Counterculture was that Christianity is about rebellion. But this is not true. Rebellion is about adolescence. It is about saying there is no authority by which I will abide.
Sin is about rebellion. Adam rebelled against God by disobeying his commands. We all rebel against God. We call that sin.
Rebellion against culture is usually just rebellion against authority. It usually means I will dress different and listen to different music. I will not embrace your values. This is not necessarily because your values are bad, but more so that I want to have my own and don't want you to tell me what to do.
Christianity is not about rebellion, but about abandonment and devotion. We do not rebel against the culture, we abandon it. We leave behind all that would bind us to the world so that we may embrace Christ. The Bible is clear that children are to honor their parents, not rebel against them. But, Jesus called men to abandon their parents, leave the comfort of parents behind, and follow him. He called people to abandon their money and their rights and their destinies to take up the cross and follow him in total devotion.
Jesus did not rebel against the Romans, even though many people wanted him to. He did not teach rebellion and neither did Paul. In fact, Paul taught obedience to the government, to the church elders and to parents. Both, however, taught abandonment and devotion. Paul considered every thing as garbage compared to the riches of simply knowing and following Christ.
The skate board, the do rag or the Van Dyke beard will not bring you to a pure and simple relationship with Christ. But, abandoning the pretenses and accouterments of your culture or subculture and embracing Christ will.
Sin is about rebellion. Adam rebelled against God by disobeying his commands. We all rebel against God. We call that sin.
Rebellion against culture is usually just rebellion against authority. It usually means I will dress different and listen to different music. I will not embrace your values. This is not necessarily because your values are bad, but more so that I want to have my own and don't want you to tell me what to do.
Christianity is not about rebellion, but about abandonment and devotion. We do not rebel against the culture, we abandon it. We leave behind all that would bind us to the world so that we may embrace Christ. The Bible is clear that children are to honor their parents, not rebel against them. But, Jesus called men to abandon their parents, leave the comfort of parents behind, and follow him. He called people to abandon their money and their rights and their destinies to take up the cross and follow him in total devotion.
Jesus did not rebel against the Romans, even though many people wanted him to. He did not teach rebellion and neither did Paul. In fact, Paul taught obedience to the government, to the church elders and to parents. Both, however, taught abandonment and devotion. Paul considered every thing as garbage compared to the riches of simply knowing and following Christ.
The skate board, the do rag or the Van Dyke beard will not bring you to a pure and simple relationship with Christ. But, abandoning the pretenses and accouterments of your culture or subculture and embracing Christ will.
Digging through the pile of "un-read" newspapers this morning, I ran across an article in Sunday's Startlegram about "Christian Counterculture". The article was reporting lite, but basically mentioned briefly several supposedly counterculture christian movements, mostly built around a certain style of music or skateboarding.
Those movements are not really counter-culture, but sub-culture movements. Similar to the Jesus Movement, although they deny it, they are involved in a sub-culture and they impose it on their practice of Christianity. Although they complain about suburban culture and that everyone in the church has a house and two cars, to be in their church you have to like a certain type of music, dress a certain way, and speak a defined and limited lingo and have the right kind of facial hair.
It is really trite. Pardon the bluntness, but I lived on the fringe of the Jesus Movement in college. It was not all bad, and did attract some new people into the faith. It did, in some cases, seek a purer and simpler Christianity. But, as things progressed, it degenerated into stupid bumper stickers, music that imitated the music popular with college students at the time and a dress code. Sure, the code did not include coats and ties or panty hose. But you were not accepted into the groups if you did not have long hair, bell bottom jeans and funky shoes. It was good for me, because I was a fashion hippy. By that I mean I did not do drugs or believe in free love, but I really liked the clothes. The Jesus Movement allowed me to be a fashion hippy and a Christian. That made you a Jesus Freak, by the way.
The only thing more trite than a skateboard church trying to maintain it is radical and pure is the 40 and 50 year old who thinks he can imitate the dress, lingo and facial hair and appeal to the kids on that basis.
Pardon me for being jaded. One thing about living a while is, you see things continue to come and go, and people try to tell you it is new, when it is not.
Pure and simple faith would be a devotion to following Christ to the extent of divorcing yourself from culture and counter culture. When you do that, let me know. Otherwise, it's just the same old thing: youthful rebellion against the parent's generation.
Been there, done that and threw away the t-shirt.
Those movements are not really counter-culture, but sub-culture movements. Similar to the Jesus Movement, although they deny it, they are involved in a sub-culture and they impose it on their practice of Christianity. Although they complain about suburban culture and that everyone in the church has a house and two cars, to be in their church you have to like a certain type of music, dress a certain way, and speak a defined and limited lingo and have the right kind of facial hair.
It is really trite. Pardon the bluntness, but I lived on the fringe of the Jesus Movement in college. It was not all bad, and did attract some new people into the faith. It did, in some cases, seek a purer and simpler Christianity. But, as things progressed, it degenerated into stupid bumper stickers, music that imitated the music popular with college students at the time and a dress code. Sure, the code did not include coats and ties or panty hose. But you were not accepted into the groups if you did not have long hair, bell bottom jeans and funky shoes. It was good for me, because I was a fashion hippy. By that I mean I did not do drugs or believe in free love, but I really liked the clothes. The Jesus Movement allowed me to be a fashion hippy and a Christian. That made you a Jesus Freak, by the way.
The only thing more trite than a skateboard church trying to maintain it is radical and pure is the 40 and 50 year old who thinks he can imitate the dress, lingo and facial hair and appeal to the kids on that basis.
Pardon me for being jaded. One thing about living a while is, you see things continue to come and go, and people try to tell you it is new, when it is not.
Pure and simple faith would be a devotion to following Christ to the extent of divorcing yourself from culture and counter culture. When you do that, let me know. Otherwise, it's just the same old thing: youthful rebellion against the parent's generation.
Been there, done that and threw away the t-shirt.
Monday, March 13, 2006
1 Corinthians 6
6:1-8 Believers as Judges
1 When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! 4 So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? 5 I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, 6 but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers? 7 To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? 8 But you yourselves wrong and defraud—even your own brothers! (English Standard Version)
Paul continues his discussion of the church. He has been discussing its purity. Then he discussed its authority, saying the church should discipline the believer who is living in sexual immorality. Now, in chapter 6, he continues his discussion of church authority by discussing disagreements between believers within the church.
In verse 1, he condemns the practice of taking a fellow saint before the secular legal authorities in a civil law suit. His use of the word “dare” in verse 1 is an expression of shock. He says the saints have the best ability to judge. He knows this because saints will judge: (1) the world; (2) the angels.
Also, some commentators say “judge” here is the same as “rule”. The saints will rule over the world. This is stated in Psalm 49:14 and Daniel 7:22, 27, and Revelation 2:26-27. However, the context here is clearly judging.
2 Peter 2:4 says “for if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment…” We might infer from this that we will judge the fallen or rebellious angels. Paul seemed to know this as a matter of revelation.
Since this is so, how could you not judge disputes? In verse 2, he says these are trivial cases compared to judging the world and judging angels. So, sending disputes between believers to the courts is a failure for the church.
Then, he said it would be better to suffer the wrong than to take a fellow believer to court. Here we again see that much of the Christian life is about giving up rights, not asserting them. This is similar to Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:39-42: “But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.”
This is another continuation from the practice of Old Testament Israel. Beginning with Moses, they set up their own judges for their disputes, and no Israelite would have thought of going outside to Gentiles to judge disputes. Here Paul calls the non-believers the “unrighteous” or the “unjust”. Even after the Jews lost their authority over civil government, they appointed arbiters who handled their disputes within the community so they would not bring each other before the courts of the Gentile pagans.
6:1-8 Believers as Judges
1 When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! 4 So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? 5 I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, 6 but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers? 7 To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? 8 But you yourselves wrong and defraud—even your own brothers! (English Standard Version)
Paul continues his discussion of the church. He has been discussing its purity. Then he discussed its authority, saying the church should discipline the believer who is living in sexual immorality. Now, in chapter 6, he continues his discussion of church authority by discussing disagreements between believers within the church.
In verse 1, he condemns the practice of taking a fellow saint before the secular legal authorities in a civil law suit. His use of the word “dare” in verse 1 is an expression of shock. He says the saints have the best ability to judge. He knows this because saints will judge: (1) the world; (2) the angels.
Also, some commentators say “judge” here is the same as “rule”. The saints will rule over the world. This is stated in Psalm 49:14 and Daniel 7:22, 27, and Revelation 2:26-27. However, the context here is clearly judging.
2 Peter 2:4 says “for if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment…” We might infer from this that we will judge the fallen or rebellious angels. Paul seemed to know this as a matter of revelation.
Since this is so, how could you not judge disputes? In verse 2, he says these are trivial cases compared to judging the world and judging angels. So, sending disputes between believers to the courts is a failure for the church.
Then, he said it would be better to suffer the wrong than to take a fellow believer to court. Here we again see that much of the Christian life is about giving up rights, not asserting them. This is similar to Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:39-42: “But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.”
This is another continuation from the practice of Old Testament Israel. Beginning with Moses, they set up their own judges for their disputes, and no Israelite would have thought of going outside to Gentiles to judge disputes. Here Paul calls the non-believers the “unrighteous” or the “unjust”. Even after the Jews lost their authority over civil government, they appointed arbiters who handled their disputes within the community so they would not bring each other before the courts of the Gentile pagans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)