Stop Hiding from God

Rewriting the Manhattan Declaration

2009-12-08T17:20:00.000-08:00

Recently I've become involved with an effort to form a reasoned and faithful counter-statement to the Manhattan Declaration. I am aware that my actions will likely draw the ire and/or disdain of many of my Christian sisters and brothers; however, I believe the Declaration is an incomplete and potentially dangerous document which supports a narrow ideological objective. It is culturally conservative but barely 'evangelical' -- that is, in the original sense of the word.

The Manhattan Declaration is not good news. While it contains elements of the gospel, it is an incomplete gospel. As you read on, I urge you to follow the advice of the elder John in his first epistle, chapter 4, verse 1:

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

The remainder of this post is as follows:

Text which I posted to a discussion board on the 'Manhattan Refutation' Facebook group, which takes the approach of rewriting the 'Life' section of the Manhattan Declaration to bring it in line with a full rejection of the 'culture of death' and affirmation of life. I'm reproducing the text of what I wrote here, so it is available to a much wider audience, and so it can be reviewed for comment and challenge by those who are not comfortable associating with the 'Manhattan Refutation'.
Links to resources and pages, including the actual Manhattan Declaration itself.

AFFIRMING LIFE

Here is what I’ve been mulling over … is it possible to take the very words of the Manhattan Declaration and redeem them by transforming them into a much fuller inclusion of the Kingdom of God that Christ calls us into?

I am not satisfied with my effort so far. However, I am posting here my down-and-dirty first attempt to transform the ‘Life’ section of the MD so that everyone else can get a better idea of the approach I’m suggesting we consider.

The ‘Life’ section was the first section of the MD that was glaringly ‘sinful by omission’. In other posts, I alluded to the fact that I believed the MD’s biggest failures were in what it omitted. The ‘Life’ section is a prime example. The authors rightly focused on the problem with the ‘culture of death’ but like most ‘Pro Life’ believers I’ve encountered, they are only ‘Pro’ the Life of a limited group of individuals.

Somehow, it’s still OK to promote a culture of death when it comes to our cultural and political enemies; it’s still OK to promote a culture of death by filling our minds with violent and murderous ‘entertainment’; it’s still ok to promote a culture of death by seeking military solutions to diplomatic problems and by subjecting our enemies to torture and violence that we justify as necessary so we can have enough intelligence (stupidity?) to preemptively execute them before they execute us.

I realize that many people will disagree with the above very politically (and evangelically) incorrect statements I’ve made, and I apologize in advance for my part in anything that has offended. However, I do not believe that any of us should apologize for the offense of the Cross.

That said, here is a modified writing of (most of) the ‘Life’ section of the Manhattan Declaration. If you read it in parallel with the MD, you’ll notice that a lot of the language did not need to be changed at all, and still matches the MD word-for-word.

----

Life

A culture of death inevitably cheapens life in all its stages and conditions by promoting the belief that lives that are imperfect, immature and inconvenient, or which are abhorrent to our own moral sensibilities, are discardable. This death-culture is woven into our society’s consciousness so insidiously that many who genuinely and authentically vie for the sanctity of life remain totally unaware of its broad influence, and instead focus on only a few ‘litmus test’ issues such as abortion and euthanasia. As Christians, we assert that all life is sacred and that no life is discardable – not even the lives of those we consider our enemies. We call the culture of death into the light so that all its tentacles may be exposed. A culture of death takes root in any cheapening of life, and is particularly revealed in how we, as a society, choose to use our freedoms. We have failed to choose wisely, and have allowed or actively participated in discretionary ‘entertainment’ that promotes obsession with crime, militarism, murder and other types of violence and abuse. We have casually accepted these as appropriate and acceptable forms of entertainment, whether the ‘passive’ entertainment of movies and television, or the active, ‘behavioral rehearsing’ entertainment of shoot-to-kill video games, and have failed to use the blessings of liberty to engage in activities that promote life, reconciliation, and healing …

…. Eugenic notions such as the doctrine of lebensunwertes Leben (“life unworthy of life”) were first advanced in the 1920s by intellectuals in the elite salons of America and Europe. Long buried in ignominy after the horrors of the mid-20^thcentury, they have returned from the grave. The only difference is that now the doctrines of the eugenicists are dressed up in the language of “defending our homeland” and “preserving the foundational unit of society.” Waging wars and fostering homophobic hatred are just a few examples of cleverly disguised methods to achieve the extinction of groups of people deemed “unworthy of life”. We will be united and untiring in our efforts to roll back the license to kill that began with the authorization of hatred against those who are demonized as political and cultural enemies…

…We will work, as we have always worked, to bring assistance, comfort, and care to those in need and to those who have been victimized by hatred and war, even as we stand resolutely against the corrupt and degrading notion that it can somehow be in the best interests of anyone to submit to the deliberate killing of people we choose to demonize as ‘enemies’. Our message is, and ever shall be, that the just, humane, and truly Christian answer to violence and evil is for all of us to love and care for all of God’s children, whether friends or enemies, remaining fully aware that Christ died for us, even while we ourselves were still God’s enemies.

…A truly prophetic Christian witness will insistently call on those who have been entrusted with temporal power to fulfill the first responsibility of government: to protect the weak and vulnerable against violent attack, and to do so with no favoritism, partiality, or discrimination. The Bible enjoins us to defend those who cannot defend themselves, to speak for those who cannot themselves speak. And so we defend and speak for the born and unborn, the abled and ‘disabled’, the dependent and ‘independent’, the ‘straight’, the ‘gay’, the ‘saint’ and ‘sinner’, citizens of our own nation, and citizens of other nations, whether enemy or friend. What the Bible and the light of reason make clear, we must make clear. We must be willing to defend, even at risk and cost to ourselves and our institutions, the lives of our brothers and sisters at every stage of development and in every condition, political status, and moral standing before God and humanity…

…Our concern is not confined to our own nation. Around the globe, we are witnessing cases of genocide and “ethnic cleansing,” the failure to assist those who are suffering as victims of war, the neglect and abuse of children, the exploitation of vulnerable laborers, the sexual trafficking of girls and young women, the abandonment of the aged; oppression and discrimination based on race, gender, and sexual orientation; the persecution of believers of all faiths, and the failure to take steps necessary to halt the spread of preventable diseases like AIDS. We see these travesties as flowing from the same loss of the sense of the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of human life that drives the entertainment industry and the movements for military-assisted homicide, homophobia, and disregard of the suffering of those at the bottom of society both domestically and internationally to preserve our own nation’s economic benefit. And so ours is, as it must be, a truly consistent ethic of love and life for all humans in all circumstances…

----

RESOURCES

The Manhattan Refutation Facebook Group

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=213683684151&ref=ts

While we readily affirm the preamble of the Manhattan Declaration, which states "Christians are heirs of a 2,000 year tradition of proclaiming God’s word, seeking justice in our societies, resisting tyranny, and reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering," we find that the the Declaration is in keeping with other, more unfortunate Christian traditions; those of marginalizing those who differ from the perceived "norm" and pronouncing judgment upon others.

The original cursory 'refutation' posted by the Progressive Christian Alliance:

http://www.progressivechristianalliance.org/refutation.html

The Manhattan Declaration

See http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/ for the official site by the proponents of the statement. I highly recommend you download the complete document and read it carefully and against the light of the full witness of Scripture, and then wrestle with God concerning what your response should be.

In closing, I leave you with 1 John 4:19-21:

We love because he first loved us. If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother.

What the LINK tells us...

2009-06-25T06:14:00.000-07:00

The Link

An incredible 95 percent complete fossil of a 47-million-year-old human ancestor has been discovered and, after two years of secret study, an international team of scientists has revealed it to the world. The fossil’s remarkable state of preservation allows an unprecedented glimpse into early human evolution.

from: http://boards.history.com/category/The-Link/520000027

Unprecedented glimpse indeed! But if anything, it is a glimpse into how primitive our 'Science' is becoming. Read on.

What Ida Tells Us

According to the program, THIS is What Ida Tells us:

video also available at the history channel website -
http://www.history.com/content/the-link/watch-video?bcpid=23297146001&bclid=23711371001&bctid=23722127001

As Dr. Hurum states in the video (emphasis mine),

"Dis jumble of characters is, is very very exciting...and you see all these characters in the same skeleton, and you need to try to explain evolution in a new way, the early evolution of primates in a new way, because it's there, you cannot take them away"

I can't agree more with Dr. Hurum on the fact that we need to "try to explain evolution in a new way". Facts are facts, and "Ida" has observable and remarkable characteristics. Science deals with facts, and facts are the basis for supporting, and for falsifying, scientific Laws, Theories, and Hypotheses.

A NEW WAY to explain evolution

As far as explaining evolution in a new way, the producers of the program do not leave us hanging. On this point they turn to Dr. Don Johanson, who indeed explains evolution in a new way...one that has NOTHING to do with Science. To save myself extra work, I'll just reproduce my observations as written in my comment on a LinkedIn discussion board.

If you're LinkedIn, see the entire discussion at: Find out what "The Link" on the History Channel wasn't telling you.

'The Link' was very entertaining and well-produced, but in my opinion, clearly unscientific and a depressing example of how 'mindless' our culture can be. It told a pretty good story, but in the end I saw nothing in the facts reported that resulted in the conclusions the program made. Much speculation, but no empirical science.

The most blatant and saddening example of the collapse of the scientific method in this program (and perhaps in general?) came near the end of the program, where Dr. Don Johansen (of 'Lucy' fame) takes the pulpit bemoaning how "Today" there's so much controversy about evolution. He says:

"...lots of people don't want to ACCEPT evolution...a lot of people say 'I don't believe in evolution.' And I say to them, 'I don't believe in evolution either.' And they go, 'Wh...what do you mean?' I said, 'ANY MORE THAN I BELIEVE IN GRAVITY. It's a fact.

"If I let go of an object it's going to fall to the ground. No matter how many times we do this experiment, it's going to fall to the ground. So gravity is a LAW. It's a FACT. It's an OBSERVABLE thing.

"And it's the same thing with Evolution."

I nearly FELL OFF THE COUCH when I watched him say this. How can someone who's been a Scientist his entire career, and who has the credentials and CV including his discovery of Australopithecus Afarensis, be so WRONG (or deceptive?) regarding the difference between Scientific Law, Fact, and theory?

The certainty of Evolution is the same as certain
ty about Gravity?????? Is he NUTS?????? I can observe one species changing into another just like I can observe an object fall when I let go of it? What?????

If such blatant disregard for logic and scientific method--supported by excellent production and an entertaining story--is the norm, it's no wonder that American education falls so far behind in Science achievement.

Maybe we no longer have any idea what Science really is!!!!

The DEVIL is in the details

I respect Science and true Scientific Method; I respect Biblical Criticism, Hermeneutics; I respect a careful, reasoned, and humble approach to all questions of origins.

Watching this program, sadly, has brought me down to a very low opinion of Western culture's ability to use their minds as God (or evolutionary advantage?) intended.

I had hoped that any reasonable person -- Christian or not -- would be able to watch 'The Link', see through the hype, and draw one's own reasoned conclusions from the facts. But I'm not convinced. Since I'm biased towards God (he's on my side anyway), I'm going to now present CONCLUSIVE evidence that 'The Link' was clearly the work of SATAN and ALL CHRISTIANS should RUN AWAY from it AS FAR AS POSSIBLE!!!!

When I viewed the History Channel's discussion summary this morning, here's what I saw:

666 - the NUMBER OF THE BEAST.

Therefore, 'The Link' is obviously the work of Satan. Remember, he can deceive even the VERY ELECT! STAY AWAY!!

Is All Adversity Bearable with God?

2009-06-11T08:39:00.000-07:00

We are all very familiar with the promise in 1 Cor 10:13 that God "will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear" (NIV).

We usually understand this like Eugene Peterson's 'The Message' puts it:

"God will never let you down; he'll never let you be pushed past your limit; he'll always be there to help you come through it."

I think we, and Peterson, interpret the verse incorrectly.

Here's some ideas to consider:
The greek word used means 'temptation' or 'test': http://concordance.biblos.com/peirasmo_.htm

The root word is 'peirazo', which means (according to http://strongsnumbers.com/greek/3986.htm):

"a putting to proof (by experiment (of good), experience (of evil), solicitation, discipline or provocation); by implication, adversity -- temptation"

In Short, WHAT PAUL SAYS:

God does not overwhelm us with unbearable adversity, temptation, the death of our children, etc. WHEN HIS PURPOSE IN TESTING US is to 'prove out' our faith.

WHAT PAUL DOES NOT SAY:

"All evil/adversity/etc. that befalls us is part of God's will, design, and purpose for us, and it is all for the purpose of testing and building our faith, and through all of it God will provide a way out and the strength to bear it".

We LIKE the verse to mean what Paul does not say. Even Eugene Peterson wants it to say that.

But I believe Paul's objective is to assure us of God's goodness and his character in the tests and temptations that he WILLS (causes or preferentially allows) to come our way.

Paul does NOT say that all S&!T that dumps on us is from God and/or is what God REALLY wants to happen to us...and he does NOT say that all S&!T is bearable and for our benefit.

SO IN SHORT: we can trust that if God puts us to the test, it is for our benefit.

We also are afforded the right--by this verse, at least--to trust that evil which befalls us and DOES crush us beyond what we can bear is NOT from God and does not speak one ounce about his goodness, his love for us, and his character.

Sin, death, and corruption have real, powerful, and gratuitous effects. God is in the business of redemption, for sure, but to make pollyanna claims that we are ordained to have supernatural Atlas-like world-bearing strength underneath every single possible imaginable (and even unimaginable) burden of adversity that drops upon us is NOT supported by this verse.

Such pollyannaism certainly does not seem to be supported by human experience, and, I would wager, is not really supported by other Biblical texts when carefully read.

However, I am not a professional exegete or theologian, so please feel free to present evidence to the contrary. It is much better to stand corrected than to fall in ignorance.

The Real Reason Saturn is Going Under

2009-05-07T06:40:00.000-07:00

Seems that customers would have a hard time making the monthly payment . . .

Pay attention to what those political ads are really saying . . .

2008-10-20T05:29:00.000-07:00

Why Pumpkins Shouldn't Drink

2008-10-20T05:27:00.000-07:00

For when you don't know how to say, "I DON'T"

2008-10-10T04:59:00.000-07:00

When you don't know how to say it, say it with Chocolate!

The Sermon

2008-07-11T09:59:00.001-07:00

I am very thankful for all the feedback everyone provided - it was very helpful! Many of you had several observations in common, and I applied as much as I could to do the best of my ability to communicate.

I received a lot of positive feedback at the end of the service, so I was very grateful for your help and especially for the fact that God's word was heard in a unique way, with your help, and in spite of the fact that when actually preaching I stumbled most of the way through, got things out of order, etc., even though I tried converting the text into a form that would be much easier to follow when speaking. I apparently have a long way to go before I can actually deliver the same sermon I prepare . . . but then again, as Christ's grace is sufficient, and his power made perfect in weakness, I will concede that stuttering, losing track, and struggling to speak without looking down at the paper and reading word-for-word may be just the weakness that Christ is looking for.

In any case, I thought I could thank everyone who helped speak God's word last night by providing you the final text/notes I spoke from. To God be the glory!

The Text: 1 John 5:1-8

1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.

2 This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands.

3 This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome,

4 for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith.

5 Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.

6 This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.

7 For there are three that testify:

8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

The Sermon (Draft/Notes):

Our first apartment, on Glade Mill Road, was a real Dive.

But enough for our small family at the time – just the three of us.

The living quarters left a lot to be desired; carpeted over an old, oily, and musty garage floor; a bathroom with no working shower; well water that stained everything black.

Aside from a horrible problem with jumping spiders, a refrigerator that barely worked and a freezer that didn’t work at all, the apartment’s most memorable “badge of Divehood” was its oil furnace that didn’t heat well and had gone dangerously on the fritz more than once, spewing black soot and carbon monoxide all through the apartment.

So as soon as we had the financial opportunity, we found a much more hospitable place to live.

Several years passed. I was at work when my phone rang; it was my wife. “Glade Mill Burned down!”

Our first apartment was gone; burned to the ground.

Part of our history together as a family was erased. And we knew it could have happened to us.

We were saddened and stunned, yet incredibly grateful to be alive.

But our gratefulness turned to sorrow as we learned more.

A child died. Volunteer firemen pulled Philip from the building shortly before the building collapsed. He died on the scene. His mother survived.

This brings us to our text tonight . . .

. . . where we will engage ourselves with God’s word and this tragedy to help us understand ourselves – who we are as Christians and what our Christian faith really means.

John provides us some key understanding in tonight’s scripture; he answers these questions for us:
· What does it mean to believe in Jesus Christ?
· What does it mean for how I live my life?

Belief in Jesus Christ means LOVE.
(Read Verse 1)
John provides some key tests:
· One who is born of God
· One who truly loves God (the father) loves other Christians (his child / the children of God)

Rather than implying that we don’t need to love “non-Christians”, John emphasizes the importance of Love in the Christian family – not just love for God, but a shared love for each other.

As it is, we have much higher expectations of family members than strangers.

We hold family to a higher standard when we evaluate their actions towards us, or towards other family members. We don’t exclude loving others, but we put our family as a priority.

To illustrate this:

Philip’s Mom escaped from the burning building long before the firemen found him and pulled him out.

For my wife and I, this left us with a nagging question: why was the mother able to save her own life, but not her son’s?

Was this an unfair question?

It is a terrifying thing to run into a fire. At one or more times in our lives, we all have been burned—and with that intense pain we almost immediately learned to be careful with fire, and to be afraid of throwing ourselves into it.

We don’t consider firemen heroes because they battle through a fluffy field of feathers; the heroic image is based upon their courage to face that fear we all share, and the very real risks of burning and death they face with each fire, and each rescue.

So in part, perhaps the answer to our question was FEAR. Ordinary, very human, fear. But that was not the whole story.

We learned much more of the story when a detective paid us a visit.

The initial investigation into the fire had yielded many questions, including the details of Mom’s account. Her story did not add up—especially in light of an ongoing custody dispute with Philip’s father. The detective needed a better understanding of how the apartment was laid out, what escape routes there were, and any other details that might explain the fire and the fate of Mother and child.

The two had been sleeping. Napping.

Mom on the couch; Philip—we believe—in his bedroom. The furnace was broken. (No surprise here, as it had been the same for us when we lived in the apartment.) A kerosene heater in the living room, right near the couch, provided warmth.

Mom awoke to flames and smoke, and she ran . . . not out the front door, which was just a few steps from the couch, but down the hallway, away from the door, around the back, and out through the garage.

When Philip was finally found, he was pulled from his bedroom window. This had been my son’s bedroom. It had a bay of awning windows that several times my wife and son had crawled through to get inside when they accidentally got locked out.

What did not make sense was that—even if the fire had blocked the way from the living room through the kitchen and into Philip’s bedroom—once outside, Philip’s Mom should have been able to reach or crawl through the window to get him. His bed was right by the window.

But she did not.

Now, we all make poor judgments. We all make mistakes. We crack under pressure.

We probably would give little thought to the fact that an anonymous passerby did not run into the building or crawl through the window to save Philip. We appreciate and honor the firemen who make it their job to put themselves at such risk for strangers.

But for a mother, who gave birth to and raised this child for 4 years . . . for her to act just like a stranger?

Her immediate, uncensored response was to escape herself. Perhaps we can understand this. But after escaping the building, and knowing her son still slept inside, and not do anything to save him?

Most times—if not all—our gut reaction, our impulsive, uncensored response to an emergency allows us no opportunity to “think first” and respond in a way that makes sense,

that fits the image we believe that we are . . . the one that makes us look the best. We instead look the worst.

These are the occasions that, more often than not, betray our true heart.

How long did the building burn before the firemen arrived? How long did Mom act like a stranger?

In the face of fire, in the face of losing her son forever, in the face of the burning hatred and the battle to break free from Philip’s father, what does this betray about Mom’s true heart?

Philip’s Mom is his family. We hold her to a much higher standard to Love her child than we would ever hold a stranger, or even a fireman.
Indeed, for anyone to lay down their life for Philip would be noble, and honorable, and loving. But for family, especially for one’s own children, we expect Love above all, and self-interest far behind it.

This is John’s point. If we say that we love God, but in our actions, we do not love God’s children, something is awry . . .

. . . and we ought to wonder whether we truly believe. (Read verses 1 and 2)

John is not saying that we are exempt from loving strangers or enemies, and that we must love only God’s children; rather, our actions—especially our uncensored re-actions—are evidence by which we should examine ourselves and see our true heart.

We are bound in love as God’s family. This higher standard of love for family members should be nothing surprising.

So what really is this higher standard? Does it mean only that we are ready to die for someone else if needed, but nothing else?

John sums it up like this: “. 2 This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. 3 This is love for God: to obey his commands.”

Commands? Obeying? Carrying out commands? Is God giving us orders, under the duress of painful punishment if we disobey?

If we ‘fall in line’ merely to avoid pain and punishment, does that mean we love God? If we are merely nice and respectful towards others, does that mean we love them?

The words we find translated as ‘obeying’ and ‘carrying out’ have also been rendered as ‘keep’ and ‘observe’ in various Bible translations. And where we read ‘commands’ the original language signifies the standard of conduct that God has established . . . not “orders” that dictate specific action.

So John is not saying that we must “show love or else.”

Rather, obeying and carrying out God’s commands is to act in a manner which, when viewed in light of God’s holiness, his purposes, and his design for our relationships, is easily recognizable as behavior that meets God’s standards.

Keeping a checklist of commands we follow, all the ‘right things’ we do, seems an easy way to make sure we’re “on the up-and-up” with God. But this is a difficult checklist. Love by dying? Do everything right? Be perfect? It is a heavy responsibility.

But John states that God’s commands “are not burdensome.”

How so?

In the majority of this letter, John has been emphasizing that what identifies a Christian as a Christian is one’s character – a character of love. He calls us ‘children of God’ . . . we are “born of God” and as such, we share in God’s character. We have God’s commands “written on our heart”. God’s will and God’s purposes are part of our being; part of our nature; part of our very essence. A checklist isn’t necessary – even our uncensored impulses betray our transformed character.

John puts it this way: “This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith.” He assures us that “…everyone born of God overcomes the world.”

Just in case we didn’t get it, he emphasizes it even more: “5 Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.”

God’s commands are not burdensome because when we have been born of God, they have become part of us. How so? Just because I can say:

“I believe in God the Father, the Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son our Lord. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, Suffered under Pontius Pilate . . .”

…does that mean I believe? Does that mean I possess the faith John speaks of here?

What is this faith? It helps to know that the words for “faith” and “believe” in the original language are the same.

In English, we lose this connection. “Believe” to us is an intellectual judgment…when given a proposition, such as, “Ron is preaching at Masonic Village at Sewickley”, we agree that “Yes, it is true.”

Our notion of faith, on the other hand, is much closer to the words that John penned.

For example, when we say that a 4-year old has faith in his mother that she will feed, shelter, and protect him, we certainly don’t mean that the kid reasons through the alternatives and makes intellectual assent. The child trusts in his Mom; he wholeheartedly, without a thought, without any external motivation, coercion, or manipulation stakes his life on that truth. No, even more; the child is not first evaluating whether it is true, and then deciding whether or not his Mom is worthy of trust. No! He has faith in his Mom. That is, he trusts in a person, not in a proposition. His faith precedes any “belief” he has in his Mom.

So what John is saying to us is that the “the victory that overcomes the world” is not a ‘religion’ or a ‘belief’ or a ‘worldview’. God’s command to love is not a burden, but rather a release from the burden of the world.

The victory that is won by our faith is our complete surrender, our throwing of our entire life upon Christ; it is giving up our authority to direct our own life, and instead taking up the cross daily to follow Christ.

In faith, we stake our entire existence on God, the God revealed in Christ, who John tells us “did not come by water only, but by water and blood.”

“6 This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”

In John’s time, very early in the history of the church, a problem with belief was leading to a problem with faith.

It was not just that Christians were not acting in love towards each other; some were downplaying or denying that Jesus’ death on the cross was necessary for salvation. It was offensive and appalling; that God should take on this dirty human flesh, and then be beaten and executed. That God should shed blood and die--it turned the Hellenistic culture’s idea of God on its head.

Instead, these folks focused on baptism as the work of salvation. Cleansing and rebirth through water was not offensive, and was already in practice before Jesus’ time. Baptism did not require God to suffer in human flesh. It did not require blood; only water.

And if Jesus came by water only, what would be required of us? What would the higher standard be?

To get a sprinkling as an infant, or a dunk in a river? Saying the apostle’s creed? To make intellectual assent to a few key doctrines? And then we’re assured our place in heaven, and we can live how we want now?

John hammers the spike on its head. Blood – suffering, sacrifice, the cross – is Christ’s way; not just baptism. Not just a ritual.

Christ was fully incarnate; he suffered and died and rose again in order to save us. He did not come just to assure us a luxurious suite in heaven’s many mansions, but to rescue us from the fire of the depraved world we were born into, a fire whose flames we were fanning. Christ’s way is the water and the blood; and the Holy Spirit bears witness, testifies, that this is the truth.
Ritual would never do. Faith, sacrifice, Love – these are the pillars of the Christian life. When we encounter someone transformed by Christ, and witness these three in action, we are astonished.

Throughout his letter, John makes this astonishing behavior his focus. Many of you may know that several words in the New Testament are translated as ‘Love’.

In English, Love means many things. “I love ice cream.” “I love my cat.” “I love you.”

In our culture, when it comes to human relationships, we are most accustomed to thinking of Love as that feeling, that force that draws us together.

The Bible does have a word for this - phileo – which emphasizes, as Vine’s expository dictionary of Biblical Words puts it; “tender affection.” However, although the New Testament uses phileo in speaking of the Love of God the Father for God the Son, and of the Love of God for his children, it “is never used in a command to men to love God.”

“Never used in a command.”

As we discussed earlier, keeping God’s commands involves living up to a standard. So God is not setting a standard that we have to feel a certain way about him. He is not giving us orders to feel warm and fuzzy about him, or about anyone else.

The standard, instead, is set by the word for Love that John uses in our text tonight, and throughout this letter; agape.

Agape is no ordinary Love. It is a selfless love that goes far beyond feeling and affection—even independent of it.

To help remind myself what agape love is all about I think of the English transliteration – a – g – a – p – e. Read in English, that’s “agape”—as in, my jaw drops open in shock and astonishment.

The kind of Love spoken of as agape provokes that kind of response; shock and awe.
It is incomprehensible, unimaginable, so far beyond any mere infatuation, goodwill, or even a hint of conditionality…all we can do is stand with our mouths agape in complete amazement at the power and fullness of such abandonment, submission, and sacrifice of self for the sole benefit of another.

This is the love that Jesus showed; this is the love by which he lived, and died.

In our economy-driven culture we have been conditioned to have faith in, and perform only when, actions or goods are exchanged for something for us, or for some sort of return on our investment.

We do not give, we pay for.

We do not receive, we earn.

In God’s economy, however, this is not the case.

John draws our attention to something completely different. In God’s economy, we give – with abandon. We receive, with no credit to ourselves.

Perhaps the truth is that a booming economy, rivers of prosperity and wealth, is really a sign of our true poverty. If all is buying and selling, working and earning, and we yield our efforts, our strength, our will to that idol, is that prosperity? Or is it a great depression?

If we cannot give without expecting a return…

If we cannot receive unless we’ve earned…

We are destitute beyond comprehension.

Our astonishment, our mouths agape, should then be not at the sight of agape in action, but rather at how lost, how poor, how wretched we truly are.

When the apartment burned down, Philip’s Mom stood outside while her son was burning inside.

The firemen were there, but had not gotten the fire under control, and had not rescued Philip.

She left.

The firemen found Philip exactly where we expected – on his bed, right by his bedroom window. They pulled him through the window.

Philip was alive.

He cried for his Mom. His last words.

But she hadn’t waited for him. She left. She had not even waited to see if he was found. And she hadn’t rescued him.

Then Philip died.

But “What if?”

What if Philip’s Mom had gone back into save him? And what if she found him, and escaped with him?

What if Mom went back in, and was overwhelmed by smoke and fire? What if they both died together?

What if . . . You were Philip?

What if your Mom left you inside? What if a stranger saved you, but outside your Mom was not there for you? And abandoned you?

What if . . . God is like Philip’s Mom?

Is your God like a fireman—a stranger to you, someone who, as far as you are concerned, doesn’t know where you are or have any idea how to find you…and when he does find you and rescue you, you don’t want him anyway?

Have you entrusted your life to a God who leaves you to suffer and die alone?

Would God die with you in order to save you, even if you could not be saved? Or refuse to be saved?

Would you do the same for another?

“6 This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water…

and blood.”

Let each of us consider ourselves. What is God saying to me? What do I need to do?

Have you been like Philip’s Mom? I have. Can God rescue Philip’s Mom? Yes. Offer yourself to God. Do not hide any longer. Call out to Christ to rescue you.

Have you believed that God is like Philip’s Mom – a God who has abandoned you, and left you to burn? Ask yourself – is that the God you see in Christ? Did Christ come to give you orders, to help you manage sin, but nothing else? Did he not stake his life on God’s faithfulness – the God who resurrected Christ; did he not astonish you by loving you enough to die for you? Ask God to rescue you.

Have you been living a “faith” of ritual only, but not a faith of transformed character, fully surrendered to God? Make a decision tonight. Commit to Christ the whole of your life, of your being, of everything that you are. Stretch beyond yourself and Love others, expecting no return.
Love your spouse, your friends, your children, your grandchildren . . . even your enemies . . . expecting nothing in return, but in the full hope that God will transform them just as he is transforming you.

Lord Jesus Christ, may we Love as you have Loved; may we become as you are; may we give our lives for others, just as you have for us—not by water only, but by water, and blood.

(Prayer)

Passion at Work? A response to 'Lawnmower or Porsche' by Dan Miller

2008-06-17T10:02:00.000-07:00

Read this article first:
http://48daysblog.wordpress.com/2008/04/16/lawn-mower-or-porsche/

I submitted this comment on his blog, but figured I'd also reproduce it here. Not that I have the answers; I just get tired of all this 'follow your passion' crap!!!

Previously, I wrestled with trying to define what my passion was. I lived in constant dissatisfaction and was always looking to the next "out", staking my hope on the vocation that would "save" me from my miserable work life.

While it is important to pursue understanding of one's own passions, the first step before pursuing that passion is to discern who owns it. The rich young ruler was passionate about his posessions, so much so that he went away sad when Jesus told him that to enter the kingdom, he had to sell them all and give it all to the poor.

Passion is not necessarily the guide to fulfillment. If it is our passion, we ought first to consider whether it is "OUR" passion or God's passion . . . whether we are looking to build OUR kingdom or God's kingdom. If it is OUR passion, we are then faced with the paradox of the Gospel: we either lose our lives by seeking to fulfill that passion, or we gain our lives by sacrificing OUR passion and self-serving authority over our pursuit of it for the sake of Christ.

The Porsche ought to consider whether perhaps God's plan is for him to have a lawnmower engine, and get in the way of traffic, and not fulfill everyone else's expectations, given what it APPEARS to everyone else he should be. The same designer that gave us the Porsche also gave us the VW beetle. I've always preferred the little bug; it was my first car, and the only car I've ever been passionate about. A Porsche (of the kind you speak about) would NEVER do!!!

It is God's passion that truly fulfills us; never our own.