You have led me to the sadness
I have carried this pain
On a back bruised, nearly broken
I’m crying out to you

I will sing of Your mercy
That leads me through valleys of sorrow
To rivers of joy

When death like a Gypsy
Comes to steal what I love
I will still look to the heavens
I will still seek your face

But I fear you aren’t listening
Because there are no words
Just the stillness and the hunger
For a faith that assures

While we wait for rescue
With our eyes tightly shut
Face to the ground using our hands
To cover the fatal cut

And though the pain is an ocean
Tossing us around, around, around
You have calmed greater waters
Higher mountains have come down

I will sing of Your mercy
That leads me through valleys of sorrow
To rivers of joy

From Jars of Clay, Valley Song.

I am dying because I am black, one says.
Or because I am poor.
Or because I speak bad Spanish or Arabic.
Or because they found me in the Third Street Bar.
Or because my husband ran away.
You see, we are of the world in spite of everything
and we cling to the world’s reasons.
…Hayden Carruth, Scrambled Eggs & Whiskey.

“When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth” (Mt. 19:22).

The rich, the powerful, the successful in this life are prohibited from entering the Kingdom of God. It is not because the Kingdom of God is not offered but because grace is for losers.

“Doctrine and life are to be distinguished. Life is as bad among us as among the papists (Roman Catholic Church). Hence we do not fight and damn them because of their bad lives. Wyclif and Hus, who fought over the moral quality of life, failed to understand this…When the Word of God remains pure, even if the quality of life fails us, life is placed in a position to become what it ought to be. That is why everything hinges on the purity of the Word. I have succeeded only if I have taught correctly”
…Martin Luther.

What Luther means by this is that the very point of the doctrine of Justification by grace alone (the central doctrine of the reformation) is that discipleship is not dependent upon its results. The Christian was called to be faithful, not successful.

Luther has discribed his conversion experience as sitting on the toliet. Perhaps a better discription is as “a giant dose of theological laxative that purged Luther of his religious constipation” (Lindbert, The Eurpoean Reformations, 18)

I was reading Luther’s shorter catechism and was struck by his interpretation of the Eighth Commandment:

“We should fear and love God, and so we should not tell lies about our neighbor, nor betray, slander, or defame him, but should apologiz for him, speak well of him, and interpret charitably all that he does” (my italics).

I have noticed this a lot recently. People are prone to interpret what people do and say in a predominantly negative way.  We can all take a lesson from Luther’s understanding here and give more charity to understanding people and less suspicion to people’s motivations.

On German Drinking Habits:

“Tomorrow I have to lecture on the drunkenness of Noah (Gen. 9:20-27), so I should drink enough this evening to be able to talk about that wickedness as one who knows by expreience…One must make the best of the vices that are peculiar to each land.”

–Martin Luther

In Chapter 1 of The Historical Books Richard D. Nelson presents several observations concerning the type of literature that the Historical Books contain. Nelson is concerned to get the reader accustomed to reading the Historical Books from a non-modern perspective of history.
He writes, “many if not most of the sources used by the biblical historiographers cannot be accepted as trustworthy for direct historical reconstruction”. He backs his point be stating, “it is important to remember that no ancient source outside Israel mentions any Old Testament event or personality until the ninth century BCE” (my emphasis, 28).
He concludes his introduction by drawing into question the veracity of the Biblical text and implicitly its inspiration. He rightly notes that “Historiography is referential literature” that is, “the past as the writer thinks it took place” (my emphasis, 29). In other words, the reader of Nelson is to conclude that there is no verifiable history of either events or people, behind the Historical Books before the Ninth century BCE.

An interesting “fact” is the Merneptah Stele which is dated to the thirteenth Century (1208 BCE). In this inscription it mentions Israel as those whom Pharaoh conquered in Canaan. This first appearance of Israel, “on the stage of verifiable history” does not prove the exodus from Egypt or the conquest of Canaan.  Rather, “no independent historical evidence supports any of these accounts. In fact, recent archaeological study indicates that Israel never actually invaded Canaan from the outside, and certainly not in the unified, massive way described in the book of Joshua” (31).

However, one must ask, does the truth of an account necessarily depend on extra biblical references to “event”s or “personality” for it to be true? Should we assume that Power/Prominence on the world scene is a necessary factor in establishing the truthfulness of narrative accounts of people and events?

I was reflecting on what it means to be simultaniously in sin and grace.  As Christians we stand justified before God on account of Jesus Christ’s imputed righteousness.  Sin has been dealt with on the Cross.  The wrath of God was poured out on Jesus Chirst for the elect and through His obedience we are made righteous (Rom. 5:19).

What does this mean for the person who stands justified and yet sins?  Or better yet, how should the Christian see his sinfulness?  Far too often I have come across Christians who feel condemned by a sin they have comitted or a pattern of sin they have been unable to overcome.  This unfortunate perspective has been butressed by the pietistic stran of evangelicalism which asserts that fellowship with God is lost when a Christian sins.

In thinking about these issues and reflecting on my own sin, I believe there is a better perspective of sin in the Christian life.  Spiritual maturity is directly relfected in the character and actions of the Christian.  To use the concept of maturity is not to minimize the seriousness of sin or to negate its very real consequence.  Nevertheless, the Christian sins out of a lack of spiritual maturity. 

What I mean by maturity is Christ likeness.  Be Holy as He is Holy!  We grow in our likeness to Jesus Christ and that spiritual progress is reflected in all areas of our life: spiritual, moral, physical.  As we are progressively formed into the image of Jesus Christ sin is mortified in the flesh.

Do we ever come to full maturity?  Not this side of eternity but “he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (Phil. 1:6).

I recently came across a christian track by Jesse Woodrow,  an actor turn evangelist. Apparently he was converted in 2002 and left the debouched Hollywood lifestyle and took it upon himself to proclaim the gospel. What struck me was the final paragraph where he writes, ” Every time during the explosion of the first church in the book of Acts, the new christian spoke in tongues when they received the gift of the Holy Spirit…When you receive the Holy Ghost you have the same experience that every Christian in the bible had when they received the Spirit of God…Remember, the Bible tells us that Jesus said to the disciples right before he ascended to heaven that they should wait for the promise in Jerusalem and not to do anything until they receive the power from on high. (Acts 1:4-8) Do as Jesus taught, Don’t try to be a witness or do anything until you have received power from on high”.

There are a number of problems in what he writes. I’ll only address one that in my opinion is the most pervasive across evangelical circles.  That problem is hermeneutics.  At issue is a question of normativity.  That is, what part of the Bible is normative for the Christian today?

Woodrow’s hermeneutic has a couple of things that are right.  First, he understands that Jesus is giving a command that ought to be obeyed.   Second, the “anything” that Jesus is referring to is directly connected to witness.  The apostles were not to embark on any – ministry – thing until recieving the Holy Spirit.

The problem with his interpretation is that it is too narrow.  Woodrow is limiting his application to a very narrow and restricted context. It is as if to say that all Christians in all times are in the apostolic context in which Jesus gave his command.  The problem is that the context is very unique to both Jesus and the Apostles.  Woodrow misses that point that this command was given “right before he (Jesus Christ) ascended to heaven”.   They had to wait until the inauguration of the age of the Spirit at Pentecost. Today, we live in the age of the Spirit.  We are not in anticipation of the coming Holy Spirit.  Rather we are sealed with the Holy Spirit in correspondence with faith. Ephesians 1:13 says, “In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit”.  In fact, the Spirit is already at work prior to a full confession of faith, for faith is a work of the Spirit that works faith into those who believe. For how can a dead man believe unless he has been brought back to life?

Woodrow is right.  People must wait for the Holy Spirit before they go out and witness to Jesus Christ.  That is, they must be believers. They must testify to whom they know.  The spirit is at work bringing many sons to glory and they must be witnesses to the risen Christ to the uttermost part of the earth.

God forbid that people are restricted from the Great Commission to wait for a gift that not all Christians are given. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 12:8-11  “To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit,  9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit,  10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.  11 All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.