Cultural / Societal Transformation by the Gospel - Newbigin

From Lesslie Newbigin's book The Gospel in a Pluralist Society on pgs. 232-233.

If the gospel is to challenge the public life of our society, if Christians are to occupy the "high ground" which they vacated in the noontime of "modernity," it will not be by forming a Christian political party, or by aggressive propaganda campaigns. Once again it has to be said that there can be no going back to the "Constantinian" era. It will only be by movements that begin with the local congreation in which the reality of the new creation is present, known, and experienced, and from which men an women will go into every sector of public life to claim it for Christ, to unmask the illusions which have remained hidden and to expose all areas of public life to the illumination of the gospel. But that will only happen as and when local congregations renounce an introverted concern for their own life and recognize that they exist for the sake of those who are not members, as sign, instrument, and foretaste of God's redeeming grace for the whole life of society.

My Belly-Button Window

If you're like me, you probably never think much about your belly-button... until this week.

The Bible shows us in Romans 5 that we are born under the curse of sin, passed down to every person in every generation since Adam. We don't choose to be born under this curse, it just is what it is, because God designed the universe in such a way that the sin of parents would be passed on to their children. The curse means that we will surely be dead spiritually ("for in the day that you eat [the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil], you will surely die"). Adams sin made us all sinners. We have no choice in the matter - WE ARE BORN DEAD.

Until recently, I had never thought of belly-buttons as a scar. But, this shows us a very important thing: being human means we are certainly going to be scarred. We must have oxygen to live in the womb, and the only way for us to get this is via the umbilical cord. And the umbilical cord does us no good once we are born - it must be cut, clamped off, and fall off. And that means there will have to be a scar.

This illustrates original sin for us: we are scarred before we even know who our parents are. And we are destined to be scarred be the very fact that we are human.

NEVERTHELESS!!!

"Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s gdisobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous." (Ro 5:18-19, ESV)

All the healing we need for our scars, to redeem us out of the curse and bring us the greatest happiness we could ever have has been accomplished through the one man's righteousness. We have perfect righteousness gifted to us simply by faith in that one man - Jesus.

I never thought my belly-button would be my teacher...

Gospel Parenting - Questions from an almost Four year old

I read the creation account in The Jesus Storybook Bible (Sally Lloyd-Jones) last night with Elijah. The boy had his thinking cap on again.

Me: "Before God made anything, there wasn't anything except God, and He had a plan to send Jesus."
Elijah: “Dad, who made God?”
Me: “Nobody bubba, God has always existed.”

Later on after the creation of the animals, leading up to Adam and Eve:
Elijah: “Daddy, why did God make Adam first, not Eve?”
Me: “I think God wanted to establish an order bubba, that men would be leaders [in the family].”

And I’m not sure where this last one came from…
Elijah: “Why did God make Satan?”
Me: “Well,… because God wanted to show his wrath against evil and sin I think.”

I didn’t expect to have to think that hard that late in the day!

Immensity and Omnipresence vs. Pantheism and Panantheism

Since the Bible teaches that God is omnipresent, are we to then take a pantheistic view of God, or a panantheistic view of God?

To frame this post, let’s start with some definitions. In his book Systematic Theology, Louis Berkhof defines immensity as follows: "That perfection of the Divine Being by which He transcends all spatial limitations and yet is present in every point of space with His whole Being. It has a negative and a positive side, denying all limitations of space to the Divine Being, and asserting that God is above space and fills every part of it with His whole Being. The last words are added in order to ward off the idea that God is diffused through space, so that one part of His Being is present in one place, and another part some other place." [p.60-61].

He goes on to say that omnipresence and immensity can be regarded as synonyms, but that whereas immensity emphasizes God's transcendence, omnipresence emphasizes His immanence ("denotes that He nevertheless fills every part of space with His entire Being" [p.61]).

Pantheism denies the transcendence of God, saying that the essence of the universe is the very being of God [p.61]. Panantheism is defined at wiki.answers.com as follows:

It is the belief that God's physical body is the universe and everything in it,
and that God also transcends this universe. Existence is a part of God, but God
is larger than existence. It is similar but different to pantheism, which says
that the universe IS God in totality. It is also a belief in a genderless God,
and God as the creator.

Now for the analysis. Though there are some common elements, God’s immanence/omnipresence should not be confused with pantheism or panantheism. Immensity and omnipresence hold that God is both transcendent and present in creation at every point with His whole Being. Pantheism holds that all of creation is all of God, and thus God is “spread out” throughout the universe as matter is spread out. Pantheism says that there is no more to God than the universe, so He does not transcend the universe. Omnipresence does not conflict with the transcendence of God; that is, omnipresence holds that God is not bound by space and time. Solomon, after building the temple of the LORD, said the following in 1 King 8:27:

"But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven
cannot contain you; how much less this house that I have built!”

Pantheism is thus forced to say that God is always becoming, always changing as the creation takes on chang. However, in the Bible, God reveals Himself as never changing (Exodus 3:14; Hebrews 1:11,12; James 1:17).

So, what about panantheism? Those who believe in panantheism will at least have the transcendent attribute of God. However, they throw in the belief that the universe is God’s body. This cannot be reconciled with the Bible, for it clearly states in the second commandment that the Israelites were not to make any carved images of Him. If the image they made was (part of) Him, there would be no reason for God to make such a demand. Similarly, God would not have opposed those who “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles” (Romans 1:23).

This is not to mention the fact that the Bible never speaks of God having the universe as His body. The Bible is the supreme revelation God has given us about Himself. Yes, the creation does tell us something of God, of His invisible attributes (eternal power and divine nature) can be seen in what has been created, but the problem is that we cannot rightly understand what it is telling us because of the sin nature in us. So, this means that we are utterly reliant upon the revelation God gives us of Himself in the Scripture. So, since the Scripture never says anything about God having the universe as His body, such a view has no authoritative basis.

On Prayer and the Sovereignty of God

I find myself in the midst of a crisis which calls for MUCH prayer. It reminds me of events not too long ago when we were pleading to God for the lives of our boys on three different occasions. In all three of those situations, we were powerless to do anything, and God was all we needed and could ask for.

So, this is a similar situation for some friends of ours - I know what they are feeling right now - desperation for God to do a good work and thereby glorifying Himself. There are a number of people praying for them. Why? Because we all believe that God listens to the prayers of His saints and may act upon them.

Does this sound strange for the Almighty Sovereign God to act upon the prayers of His saints? It is not. Do not forget, Greg Wood, that God could have ordained your prayers to be that which God would act upon, thus bringing about His good plan. God ordains the end and the means to get to that end. Do not forget that your prayers show your dependency upon God. Do not forget that prayer is great blessing, the blessing of communion with your joyful heavenly Father. God has not put the universe in motion, given natural laws, stepped back, and said "Good luck!" No, He is involved in every aspect of the creation, but especially that of His moral creatures. We are not alone, we are not hopeless.

This truth of the Sovereignty of God gives me faith in Him, reverence for Him, and love for Him - and I hope that it does for you too. He gets the credit for every good in this world, and I can know that everything is done for the good of His saints (Rom. 8:28). Nothing is meaningless. Further, when God ordains a prayer as His means of acting - that prayer will be effective and nothing can stop Him.

Now come Lord Jesus, strengthen your children and their little child. Let your glory be seen and loved. Let your name be exalted. Defeat the RSV. To you, the only wise God, be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen!

Is Church Membership Biblical? Part 1

A couple of Sundays ago, the band came over to our house for lunch after the morning service. The topic of church membership came up in conversation. We asked the question, "What is church membership?" A great conversation followed, which showed that people have real concerns about "membership" and what that might communicate to people.

Here I would like to ask the question, "When the Bible speaks of the church, does it ever put forward anything that resembles church membership?" Or restated: "Does God guide His flock in ways that make local church membership a useful means of grace?"

Observation #1
Our church is moving forward in establishing/growing its leadership. We will have our second elder soon, and I am sure there are more to follow. One of the charges given to elders is that they are to pay careful attention to themselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made them overseers, and to care for the church of God (Acts 20:28). So, it seems that a reasonable question for an elder is, "Who is the flock for which I am an overseer?" Obviosly, the elders in Ephesus were expected to understand Paul when he made this statement, and Paul spoke of a particular duty to protect some group of people called a "flock." But, how are these people identified?

So, my observation here is this: The elders are to guard a certain set of people, and by having those people make a commitment to that particular church family, agreeing to come under that elder leadership, this role is fulfilled. You can call that church membership if you want to, but what is needed is knowledge of the flock that is to be guarded. Note that this doesn't give us any indication as to how formal this was (written versus verbal).

Would elders be responsible for everyone who ever darkened the door of one of the church's gatherings? I cannot imagine the answer being yes. Wouldn't they be responsible though for those who wanted their godly shepherding? But you may say, "there was just 'the church' in those days, each city with a set of believers, and so the elders were responsible for all of them. But, would elders in our day be responsible for all of the believers in their city, though they may never come to the elders' particular gathering of believers? I think it is reasonable to say "no." So this seems to indicate that people need to commit to being members of one another, in the sense that we have members of our physical body. People need to come under the leadership of the elders, and entrust to them the right to hold them spiritually accountable.

More reasons for us to be committed to a local church are to come...

Who is at the Center of God's Universe?

Premise 1: Righteousness is defined as esteeming (through emotions, thoughts, and actions) that which is infinitely worthy of being esteemed.

Premise 2: God is righteous.

Conclusion: God's righteousness means that He esteems Himself most highly in the universe. In other words, God is the center of His own universe. He is the most God-centered being there is, and there is no unrighteousness (e.g. selfishness) in His doing so.

Credits: John Piper gave this definition of righteousness in a sermon on Romans 9. I am sure that Jonathan Edwards said or influenced the conclusion.