powered by Hipcast.com
Running Time: 13 minutes/30 seconds.
I had indented to publish a review of this book at this time last year. After reading the first two parts, circumstances did not allow me to publish until now. I am getting better in my delivery of these audio blogs, but I still have a remnant of my last cold which made it necessary to clear my throat on occasion while delivering this review. My apologies.
While it must be pointed out that none of the evidence contained in "Washington's God" is proof positive that Washington was a born again Christian, the Novaks make a strong case that Washington was the product of a Christian world view and that world view determined his conduct in public and private, even when his own life, the fate of his army and the fortunes of the new nation were at stake. He believed in a personal God who is active in His own creation. I saw one review that stated that the Novaks sometimes engaged in hagiography of Washington in this book. I must disagree. In "Washington's God", they are focusing on only one aspect of Washington's life, his religious beliefs. A very important part of any one's life to be sure, but the Novaks do not in detail evaluate his actions as a Virginia planter, military officer, or President of the United States. Therefore discerning criticism of these aspects of Washington's career which we would expect from a regular biography or historical work are not necessary here.
To purchase "Washington's God: Religious Liberty And The Father Of Our Country", click here. Or you can go to the publisher's website, Basic Books.
Michael Novak's website, http://www.michaelnovak.net/ , appears in the Links section of this blog. Last year this blog reviewed some columns on his website.
Here is a link to books written by Jana Novak.
Friday, July 3, 2009
"Washington's God: Religious Liberty And The Father Of Our Country" by Michael and Jana Novak. An Audio Review, Part I
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Friday Night Frozen Dinner And An Intellectual: "The Death Of Adam: Essays On Modern Thought" by Marilynne Robinson
Several of my recent past Friday evenings have been occupied with reading Pulitzer Prize winner Marilynne Robinson's "The Death of Adam: Essays on Modern Thought." No memorable meals were consumed during these Friday evenings, but on one of these evenings, during a rainstorm, sitting on my porch swing reading Robinson's essay entitled "Family", my eyes never left the text for seven minutes. During those seven minutes, my street flooded. I saw such sights as a neighbor on his roof climbing a metal ladder to reach a metal gutter during heavy rain, thunder and lightning and hail. (He is a former city councilman, no less.) I saw people drive fifty miles an hour into flood waters. (The neighbors screamed at one, asking if she knew better than to drive straight into a flooded street. Her reply: "I didn't know!) These cars were followed by police cars traveling the same rate of speed and getting stuck in the same flood waters. On another Friday evening, a tornado passed through, blowing down massive trees and electrical wires. Most of my neighbors lost their power, but I still had electricity to power my reading lamp. So I will always associate the reading of this book with experiencing the destructive power of nature and incredible human folly.
With that being said, I have found Robinson to be one of the finest essayists I have come across. In terms of boldness and style, there are few if any who approach these qualities displayed in "The Death of Adam."
What do I mean when I discuss her boldness. Robinson is what a Conservative would label a Liberal. She is an Obama supporter. She identifies herself as a Christian in "The Death of Adam", but is not friendly to the Evangelical persuasion of which I belong. Yet, in these essays, she does not hesitate to deviate from Liberal orthodoxy on a number of issues. She is not a Creationist, yet is no follower of Darwinism. Her criticism of Darwinism and the effect Darwinism has had on our culture is simply some of the best criticism of Darwinism from a non-scientist ever written. Robinson has the courage to reveal some of the ugly truths behind Darwinism's development and its impact on history. Here is an example from her essay "Darwinism":
"...Darwin freely concedes to the savages (as to the ants) courage and loyalty and affection. He describes an anthropologist's overhearing African mothers teach their children to love the truth. These things do not affect the confidence with which he assigns them to the condition of inferiority, which for him is proved by their liability to extermination by the civilized races." (p. 35)
Robinson correctly identifies the influence Spencer (of Social Darwinism fame) had on Darwin, and even more surprising, even traces the influence Darwinism had on the development of Nazi ideology. According to organizations that seek to stamp out any challenge to Darwinist orthodoxy, such as the National Center For Science Education, anyone who expresses such views as Robinson's is a narrow bigoted Protestant Fundamentalist out of step with the rest of "enlightened" society, even out of step with that "enlightened" institution known as the Mainline Church. (See my previous article.) In "The Death of Adam", Robinson identifies herself as a Christian who is partial to mainline Presbyterian churches.
Another example of Robinson's intellectual courage is her defense of John Calvin against those who portray Calvin as a frigid soul who was an enemy of liberty and whose theology spawned Capitalist greed. She accuses Calvin's critics of ignoring the Social Justice aspects of Calvinist theology, as well as charitable works done by Calvinists acting on that theology:
"If subsequent generations found in Cauvin a pretext for misogyny or rapacity or contempt for humankind, as historians sometimes claim, it is surely because they determined to find one. They could easily have found pretexts in his theology for acting well, if they wanted them." (p. 187)
Robinson breaks from accepted orthodoxy to make the case that the intellectual foundations of America's liberties has their roots in Calvinism as much as the Enlightenment. She is the first non-Evangelical I've come across who makes such a case.
In politics and economics, I am a Conservative. I am also an Evangelical. Robinson is none of these. In her essay "The Tyranny of Petty Coercion", she refers to Evangelical/Fundamentalists as " the clods and the obscurantists." She laments the rise of the "clods" who have ended the dominance in Christianity of the cultured mainliners who are, she believes, the true heirs of the Christianity that produced much that is good about Western culture. She has nothing good to say concerning Creationists even as she assails Darwinism. She believes that Liberals are the charitable givers in society, that it is the Liberals in and out of the Church who are most responsible for charitable works among the poor and those unable to take care of themselves. She is apparently unaware of recent sociological data that indicates otherwise. (See here and here.) Yet even if one disagrees with her, she does have insights that cannot be discounted. She is correct in pointing out how much our current prosperity is produced by a system that undermines the family by allowing employers to keep their workers on the job with little time off. I find much to disagree with Robinson in her essay "Wilderness." However, her overall thesis that Man, in always seeking to escape Civilization to live in unspoiled country, eventually causes the unspoiled country to become spoiled. Instead of seeking isolation, one should work to redeem Civilization. I can agree with that. (And Christians who are seeking to live where no man has ever gone before need to consider how their attitude is leaving many without a Christian witness.)
At first, I thought I would write a multi-part review of "The Death of Adam." However, I found that this would not be practical. There is so much good content that I did not know where to start and if I wrote all that I wanted to write, it would take more time than I have. So I'll have to put "The Death of Adam" away for now and return to it at a later date. Some would think it strange that an Evangelical/political and economic Conservative could find so much to agree with Robinson and yet not adopt her views on religion, politics and economics. Yet I can only engage any author's work through the filter that is an inseparable part of who I am.
"The Death of Adam" is published by Picador.
The next books I'll be reading for "Friday Night Frozen Dinner and an Intellectual" will be a collection of speeches, essays and letters by William Faulkner, "Fundamentalism and the Word of God" by J.I. Packer and a book on sharing the Bible with Muslims.
With that being said, I have found Robinson to be one of the finest essayists I have come across. In terms of boldness and style, there are few if any who approach these qualities displayed in "The Death of Adam."
What do I mean when I discuss her boldness. Robinson is what a Conservative would label a Liberal. She is an Obama supporter. She identifies herself as a Christian in "The Death of Adam", but is not friendly to the Evangelical persuasion of which I belong. Yet, in these essays, she does not hesitate to deviate from Liberal orthodoxy on a number of issues. She is not a Creationist, yet is no follower of Darwinism. Her criticism of Darwinism and the effect Darwinism has had on our culture is simply some of the best criticism of Darwinism from a non-scientist ever written. Robinson has the courage to reveal some of the ugly truths behind Darwinism's development and its impact on history. Here is an example from her essay "Darwinism":
"...Darwin freely concedes to the savages (as to the ants) courage and loyalty and affection. He describes an anthropologist's overhearing African mothers teach their children to love the truth. These things do not affect the confidence with which he assigns them to the condition of inferiority, which for him is proved by their liability to extermination by the civilized races." (p. 35)
Robinson correctly identifies the influence Spencer (of Social Darwinism fame) had on Darwin, and even more surprising, even traces the influence Darwinism had on the development of Nazi ideology. According to organizations that seek to stamp out any challenge to Darwinist orthodoxy, such as the National Center For Science Education, anyone who expresses such views as Robinson's is a narrow bigoted Protestant Fundamentalist out of step with the rest of "enlightened" society, even out of step with that "enlightened" institution known as the Mainline Church. (See my previous article.) In "The Death of Adam", Robinson identifies herself as a Christian who is partial to mainline Presbyterian churches.
Another example of Robinson's intellectual courage is her defense of John Calvin against those who portray Calvin as a frigid soul who was an enemy of liberty and whose theology spawned Capitalist greed. She accuses Calvin's critics of ignoring the Social Justice aspects of Calvinist theology, as well as charitable works done by Calvinists acting on that theology:
"If subsequent generations found in Cauvin a pretext for misogyny or rapacity or contempt for humankind, as historians sometimes claim, it is surely because they determined to find one. They could easily have found pretexts in his theology for acting well, if they wanted them." (p. 187)
Robinson breaks from accepted orthodoxy to make the case that the intellectual foundations of America's liberties has their roots in Calvinism as much as the Enlightenment. She is the first non-Evangelical I've come across who makes such a case.
In politics and economics, I am a Conservative. I am also an Evangelical. Robinson is none of these. In her essay "The Tyranny of Petty Coercion", she refers to Evangelical/Fundamentalists as " the clods and the obscurantists." She laments the rise of the "clods" who have ended the dominance in Christianity of the cultured mainliners who are, she believes, the true heirs of the Christianity that produced much that is good about Western culture. She has nothing good to say concerning Creationists even as she assails Darwinism. She believes that Liberals are the charitable givers in society, that it is the Liberals in and out of the Church who are most responsible for charitable works among the poor and those unable to take care of themselves. She is apparently unaware of recent sociological data that indicates otherwise. (See here and here.) Yet even if one disagrees with her, she does have insights that cannot be discounted. She is correct in pointing out how much our current prosperity is produced by a system that undermines the family by allowing employers to keep their workers on the job with little time off. I find much to disagree with Robinson in her essay "Wilderness." However, her overall thesis that Man, in always seeking to escape Civilization to live in unspoiled country, eventually causes the unspoiled country to become spoiled. Instead of seeking isolation, one should work to redeem Civilization. I can agree with that. (And Christians who are seeking to live where no man has ever gone before need to consider how their attitude is leaving many without a Christian witness.)
At first, I thought I would write a multi-part review of "The Death of Adam." However, I found that this would not be practical. There is so much good content that I did not know where to start and if I wrote all that I wanted to write, it would take more time than I have. So I'll have to put "The Death of Adam" away for now and return to it at a later date. Some would think it strange that an Evangelical/political and economic Conservative could find so much to agree with Robinson and yet not adopt her views on religion, politics and economics. Yet I can only engage any author's work through the filter that is an inseparable part of who I am.
"The Death of Adam" is published by Picador.
The next books I'll be reading for "Friday Night Frozen Dinner and an Intellectual" will be a collection of speeches, essays and letters by William Faulkner, "Fundamentalism and the Word of God" by J.I. Packer and a book on sharing the Bible with Muslims.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Clouds of Witnesses: "The Heavenly Man: The Remarkable True Story of Chinese Christian Brother Yun."
I have read the first five chapters of "The Heavenly Man" by Brother Yun and Paul Hattaway. This work tells the story of Brother Yun's conversion experience and call to ministry. Yun grew up in a remote Chinese village whose inhabitant's lives were dominated by the struggle to survive. Like Watchman Nee, his mother was a backslidden Christian. And like Watchman Nee, it was his mother's repentance that led to his salvation. Also leading to Yun's salvation, as well as the salvation of his whole family, was the miraculous healing of Yun's father who was dying of cancer. The mother, who was beginning to crack under the strain of the prospect of providing for her family with no husband, heared a message from God that Jesus loved her. Hearing this message, she fully repented. She had been brought to the Lord by missionaries before the Communists kicked all the missionaries out of China. With no one to teach her, and with the Church under Communist oppression, her faith had lapsed. After her repentance, she became a mighty servant of the Lord despite her inability to read and her limited knowledge of God's Word.
The book chronicles the miracles that Yun experienced, including receiving a rare copy of the Bible, visions of people (including specific individuals) in need and deliverance from government police trying to arrest him. Some of us here in the West may have problems believing that these miracles took place. I have no problem believing them. There are numerous sources for the existence of miracles in China and other third world countries. Missionaries from Islamic countries, where it is extremely dangerous to spread the gospel, have told me of God using miracles and visions to bring people to Jesus where missionaries could not travel. And in a land such as China, where the Communist government has such a grip on its people, it is just like our God to use such miracles to spread the gospel among a captive people who have no scriptures and can barely read themselves. There are those who have questioned Brother Yun's claims, but as this article demonstrates, there is ample evidence that the tale he tells is a truthful one and that these critics have no personal knowledge of Yun.
The chapters that I have read so far speak of Yun's conflict with the Chinese government in general terms. I have not gotten to the portions of the book dealing with his imprisonments. I was pleased to read that even in the midst of his trials as an evangelist always having to be on the run (what Yun refers to as "fleeing evangelism"), he had the faith to marry and start a family. Yun explained to his future wife, Deiling, what their life would be like, yet she agreed to marry him anyway. (Yun was arrested the day they registered with the government their intention to marry. After their wedding, they attended a illegal House Church meeting.) "The Heavenly Man" gives us accounts from Deiling's point of view.
In reading of "The Three Self" movement of the Chinese government to allow the Church to exist under government control, I was reminded of the book recently read and which I gave an audio review in June: "The Gospels Triumph Over Communism." In "The Heavenly Man", we read of individuals who sought to gain a position in the Church as government stool pigeons who persecuted true believers and fought any freedom for believers. Yun's description of believers in Jesus within the government approved Church as caged birds who fail to reproduce, on page 54 of the paperback edition, is unforgettable. As I read more of "The Heavenly Man", I will post more articles which I hope will spur you to purchase the book.
The book chronicles the miracles that Yun experienced, including receiving a rare copy of the Bible, visions of people (including specific individuals) in need and deliverance from government police trying to arrest him. Some of us here in the West may have problems believing that these miracles took place. I have no problem believing them. There are numerous sources for the existence of miracles in China and other third world countries. Missionaries from Islamic countries, where it is extremely dangerous to spread the gospel, have told me of God using miracles and visions to bring people to Jesus where missionaries could not travel. And in a land such as China, where the Communist government has such a grip on its people, it is just like our God to use such miracles to spread the gospel among a captive people who have no scriptures and can barely read themselves. There are those who have questioned Brother Yun's claims, but as this article demonstrates, there is ample evidence that the tale he tells is a truthful one and that these critics have no personal knowledge of Yun.
The chapters that I have read so far speak of Yun's conflict with the Chinese government in general terms. I have not gotten to the portions of the book dealing with his imprisonments. I was pleased to read that even in the midst of his trials as an evangelist always having to be on the run (what Yun refers to as "fleeing evangelism"), he had the faith to marry and start a family. Yun explained to his future wife, Deiling, what their life would be like, yet she agreed to marry him anyway. (Yun was arrested the day they registered with the government their intention to marry. After their wedding, they attended a illegal House Church meeting.) "The Heavenly Man" gives us accounts from Deiling's point of view.
In reading of "The Three Self" movement of the Chinese government to allow the Church to exist under government control, I was reminded of the book recently read and which I gave an audio review in June: "The Gospels Triumph Over Communism." In "The Heavenly Man", we read of individuals who sought to gain a position in the Church as government stool pigeons who persecuted true believers and fought any freedom for believers. Yun's description of believers in Jesus within the government approved Church as caged birds who fail to reproduce, on page 54 of the paperback edition, is unforgettable. As I read more of "The Heavenly Man", I will post more articles which I hope will spur you to purchase the book.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Isolate and Destroy
The tales of two politicians who are professing Christians yet engaged in extra-marital affairs have one thing in common: personal isolation. From what I have read in news accounts, it appears that Nevada Senator John Ensign's wife would not join him in Washington, D.C. This in no way excuses Ensign's behavior, yet it is possible that her presence with her husband could have averted the situation. Either she should have joined him in Washington, or to safeguard his marriage, he should have either removed his mistress from his staff or resigned his office. Mark Sanford sought isolation to act in secret. He often told his staff and security detail to remove themselves from his presence. Different circumstances, but the same strategy of the enemy of our souls. Our enemy tries to isolate us from accountability to others, or make it appear that we are out of sight of scrutiny, and then we feel free to engage in whatever secret sin we have been indulging in in our thought life. All Christians can seek accountability partners, even politicians. In their case, they should agree to have Christians on their staffs to help protect them from the snares of the enemy. The politician ought to agree that these staff members ought to report to someone in the Church whether or not personal accountability is being maintained and if it is not, at some point, this failure ought to be made public. Does this sound practical or not? I hate to say it, but I have been a Christian for 23 years and 95% of my attempts to seek accountability partners have failed. Almost all the people who I have approached have refused. Right now, I have no such person to keep me accountable. This does not speak well of the present Church.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Post # 150: Passing on a Heritage: A Father's Day Sermon
Originally Published on 6/15/08
Watching television one day, I saw a news story on Steve Forbes; Forbes was running for President that year. Part of the story featured a party for friends on the Forbes yacht. One would think that multi-millionaire (or billionaire?) Forbes would hire the best in terms of food and service. Yet who waited on the guests? All five Forbes daughters, from the oldest to the youngest (who was not yet a teenager). The reporter asked the girls whether or not they resented waiting on guests. Not one complaint. The older girls comment was that they had been performing this task for as long as they were able. In other words, from an early age, these girls were trained to forget their wants and wishes for an evening to serve others.
Hearing their answer reminded me of Communist China's Chairman Mao's assertion: "Give me a child at five and he is mine forever." Twentieth century communists knew this principle well. Whenever they gained control of a nation, they took children away from parents living in the conquered territory. These children would be indoctrinated into communist thinking so that they would no longer identify themselves with the culture they were born in, but they would think of themselves as communists. The rationale for this was to prevent the conquered nation from even wanting to throw off the yoke of oppression once the next generation came of age. Also, the communists wanted to identify the best and brightest of these children so their talent could be denied to their homeland and people. This tactic was not invented in the twentieth century; it is as old as man, and we can see this tactic employed by Israel's conquerors in the Old Testament.
In Daniel 1:1-8, we can read that Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, captured Israel after God gave it into his hands. The King ordered a portion of Israel's young male population to be brought to Babylon. Who were the males the King was seeking? "...young men in whom there was no blemish, but good-looking, gifted in all wisdom, possessing knowledge and quick to understand, who had ability to serve in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the language and literature of the Chaldeans." (Dan. 1: 4) These young males went through three years of training so that they would be able to serve the King. They were given Babylonian names so that they would lose their Hebrew identity. Four young Israelites, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah were renamed Belteshezar, Shadrack, Meshack and Abed-Nego. (Dan. 1: 5-7)
The Babylonians were purposeful in their attempts to remake Israel's youth into Baylonians. But Daniel had purposed in his heart not to participate in training that dishonored God and His Law, risking death for his obedience to God. (Dan 1:8) Where did this courage originate from? Fortunately, Daniel's parents were just as purposeful as the Babylonians in training a child. The most quoted Old Testament scripture in Ancient Israel was Deut 6:4-12 :
"Hear O Israel:The Lord our God, the Lord is one! You shall love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength. And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. So it shall be when the Lord your God brings you into the land He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give you large and beautiful cities which you did not build, houses full of good things, which you did not fill, hewn-out wells which you did not dig, vineyards and olive trees which you did not plant-when you have eaten and are full-then beware, lest you forget the Lord who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage."
This verse taught the Israelites to engage in purposeful child-training. Children were to be taught from an early age the Law of God. Daniel would not have known that the training the Babylonians were going to subject him to (Dan 1:5) violated God's Law for Israel if his parents had not taught him what is lawful. But God didn't expect Israel to learn His Word for the sake of knowledge only. The knowledge was a guide to action and attitude, that no matter what circumstances Israelites would find themselves in, they would never forget to honor and obey God and His Law. (Deut 6:12)
The world understands the value of this principle, the purposeful training of its children. The Church ignores this principle to its detriment, placing the next generations of Christians in danger of losing their souls. The goals parents should strive for are set by God and He has outlined the goal and how to achieve it in His Word. His Word is not just knowledge we are to know and teach. The Word is to guide our actions. The book of Proverbs was not just helpful advice on how to get along; Proverbs teaches us how to engage in SKILLFUL LIVING, the way to become what God wants us to be in a hostile world. When we train ourselves and our children in God's ways as outlined in His Word, when we do this IN FAITH, the Holy Spirit transforms us and our children and empowers us to live a life that pleases God.
We can see this principle work in the family of John the Baptist. Luke 1:6 tells us that his parents, Zacharias and Elizebeth, "...were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless." Both certainly felt honored when God chose them to produce the one who would be the long prophesied herald of the Messiah. However, their son would just be the herald; he would one day be overshadowed by the one he proclaimed to the world. Yet the scriptural evidence indicates that neither parent felt any jealousy toward the one their son would be a herald for. When Elizebeth was visited by Mary, the mother of the Messiah, this was her reaction:
"Now Mary arose in those days and went to the hill country with haste, to a city of Judah, and entered the house of Zacharias and greeted Elizebeth. And it happened, when Elizebeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizebeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. Then she spoke with a loud voice and said, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! But why is this granted to me, that the MOTHER OF MY LORD (capital letters added for emphasis) should come to me? For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy. Blessed is she who believed, for there will be a fulfillment of those things which were told her from the Lord.' " (Lk 1:39-45)
Had not Elizebeth walked blameless before the Lord, then she might have reacted differently to Mary's greeting. She could have thought to herself, "I have walked blameless before the Lord all these years; I am the wife of a priest! Yet my offspring must serve the child of a young girl who has not yet been married? This is not fair!" But since she walked all those years before God blameless, she became one who wanted what God wanted to come to pass. She had no envy of her young cousin or her unborn child. Neither did her husband, Zacharias. In Lk 1: 76-79, the father of John the Baptist celebrated the son's mission to herald the Messiah. The focus of his words were on Jesus' mission of saving mankind from their sins. Again, there was no envy in the father of John:
"And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Highest; for you will go before the face of the Lord to prepare His ways, to give salvation to His people by the remission of their sins, through the tender mercy of our God, with which the Dayspring from on high has visited us; to give light to those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death, to guide our way into the feet of peace."
As both Zacharias and Elizebeth walked before the Lord blameless, so they trained their son to do the same. When he undertook his mission, he was followed by crowds. He was the son of a priest. He was older than his cousin, Jesus. There were no question about who John's father was. Yet when he saw the Spirit descend like a dove and remain on Jesus, John declared for all to hear: "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!" (Jn 1:29) When Jesus began to gain more followers than John, John felt no remorse, envy, or jealousy. "He must increase, but I must decrease." (Jn 3:30) John was truly more than the physical son of his parents; in that he followed the way in which they had trained him, he was their spiritual heir as well.
The same dynamic of training and obedience in Gods Word leading to Holy Spirit formation and transformation is available to all of Christ's followers and their families. God doesn't just hope we seek this dynamic, He demands it of us, both as disciples and as parents, training our children to be disciples. Both parents are important, but on this Father's Day, this message is for you fathers. Your importance in forming your child's spiritual development cannot be over estimated. Studies show that if a father refuses to attend Church, that father's children will likely follow his example, even if the mother does attend and bring the children when they are young. Some Christians think the Evangelical Church has been looking inward at the expense of the rest of the world through the Church's focus on fostering healthy, two parent families. Yet it is the two parent family that brings the stability that makes the ills of society less likely to occur. Government programs have fostered a culture of "fatherlessness" and have caused society much pain and instability. It is interesting that some within the Church have condemned movements such as Promise Keepers for creating a "militant male" syndrome among Evangelical men. Yet these groups want nothing more than for fathers to fulfill the role ordained for them by God.
Fathers, if you will learn and obey God's Word, and if you will raise your children to not only know Scripture but follow its commands, DOING ALL IN FAITH, then your children will rightly consider you one with that "cloud of witnesses" Hebrews 12:1 speaks of, whose example inspires all of Christ's disciples to "lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God." (Heb 12: 1-2)
(All Quotes from Scripture are from the NKJV)
Watching television one day, I saw a news story on Steve Forbes; Forbes was running for President that year. Part of the story featured a party for friends on the Forbes yacht. One would think that multi-millionaire (or billionaire?) Forbes would hire the best in terms of food and service. Yet who waited on the guests? All five Forbes daughters, from the oldest to the youngest (who was not yet a teenager). The reporter asked the girls whether or not they resented waiting on guests. Not one complaint. The older girls comment was that they had been performing this task for as long as they were able. In other words, from an early age, these girls were trained to forget their wants and wishes for an evening to serve others.
Hearing their answer reminded me of Communist China's Chairman Mao's assertion: "Give me a child at five and he is mine forever." Twentieth century communists knew this principle well. Whenever they gained control of a nation, they took children away from parents living in the conquered territory. These children would be indoctrinated into communist thinking so that they would no longer identify themselves with the culture they were born in, but they would think of themselves as communists. The rationale for this was to prevent the conquered nation from even wanting to throw off the yoke of oppression once the next generation came of age. Also, the communists wanted to identify the best and brightest of these children so their talent could be denied to their homeland and people. This tactic was not invented in the twentieth century; it is as old as man, and we can see this tactic employed by Israel's conquerors in the Old Testament.
In Daniel 1:1-8, we can read that Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, captured Israel after God gave it into his hands. The King ordered a portion of Israel's young male population to be brought to Babylon. Who were the males the King was seeking? "...young men in whom there was no blemish, but good-looking, gifted in all wisdom, possessing knowledge and quick to understand, who had ability to serve in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the language and literature of the Chaldeans." (Dan. 1: 4) These young males went through three years of training so that they would be able to serve the King. They were given Babylonian names so that they would lose their Hebrew identity. Four young Israelites, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah were renamed Belteshezar, Shadrack, Meshack and Abed-Nego. (Dan. 1: 5-7)
The Babylonians were purposeful in their attempts to remake Israel's youth into Baylonians. But Daniel had purposed in his heart not to participate in training that dishonored God and His Law, risking death for his obedience to God. (Dan 1:8) Where did this courage originate from? Fortunately, Daniel's parents were just as purposeful as the Babylonians in training a child. The most quoted Old Testament scripture in Ancient Israel was Deut 6:4-12 :
"Hear O Israel:The Lord our God, the Lord is one! You shall love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength. And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. So it shall be when the Lord your God brings you into the land He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give you large and beautiful cities which you did not build, houses full of good things, which you did not fill, hewn-out wells which you did not dig, vineyards and olive trees which you did not plant-when you have eaten and are full-then beware, lest you forget the Lord who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage."
This verse taught the Israelites to engage in purposeful child-training. Children were to be taught from an early age the Law of God. Daniel would not have known that the training the Babylonians were going to subject him to (Dan 1:5) violated God's Law for Israel if his parents had not taught him what is lawful. But God didn't expect Israel to learn His Word for the sake of knowledge only. The knowledge was a guide to action and attitude, that no matter what circumstances Israelites would find themselves in, they would never forget to honor and obey God and His Law. (Deut 6:12)
The world understands the value of this principle, the purposeful training of its children. The Church ignores this principle to its detriment, placing the next generations of Christians in danger of losing their souls. The goals parents should strive for are set by God and He has outlined the goal and how to achieve it in His Word. His Word is not just knowledge we are to know and teach. The Word is to guide our actions. The book of Proverbs was not just helpful advice on how to get along; Proverbs teaches us how to engage in SKILLFUL LIVING, the way to become what God wants us to be in a hostile world. When we train ourselves and our children in God's ways as outlined in His Word, when we do this IN FAITH, the Holy Spirit transforms us and our children and empowers us to live a life that pleases God.
We can see this principle work in the family of John the Baptist. Luke 1:6 tells us that his parents, Zacharias and Elizebeth, "...were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless." Both certainly felt honored when God chose them to produce the one who would be the long prophesied herald of the Messiah. However, their son would just be the herald; he would one day be overshadowed by the one he proclaimed to the world. Yet the scriptural evidence indicates that neither parent felt any jealousy toward the one their son would be a herald for. When Elizebeth was visited by Mary, the mother of the Messiah, this was her reaction:
"Now Mary arose in those days and went to the hill country with haste, to a city of Judah, and entered the house of Zacharias and greeted Elizebeth. And it happened, when Elizebeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizebeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. Then she spoke with a loud voice and said, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! But why is this granted to me, that the MOTHER OF MY LORD (capital letters added for emphasis) should come to me? For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy. Blessed is she who believed, for there will be a fulfillment of those things which were told her from the Lord.' " (Lk 1:39-45)
Had not Elizebeth walked blameless before the Lord, then she might have reacted differently to Mary's greeting. She could have thought to herself, "I have walked blameless before the Lord all these years; I am the wife of a priest! Yet my offspring must serve the child of a young girl who has not yet been married? This is not fair!" But since she walked all those years before God blameless, she became one who wanted what God wanted to come to pass. She had no envy of her young cousin or her unborn child. Neither did her husband, Zacharias. In Lk 1: 76-79, the father of John the Baptist celebrated the son's mission to herald the Messiah. The focus of his words were on Jesus' mission of saving mankind from their sins. Again, there was no envy in the father of John:
"And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Highest; for you will go before the face of the Lord to prepare His ways, to give salvation to His people by the remission of their sins, through the tender mercy of our God, with which the Dayspring from on high has visited us; to give light to those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death, to guide our way into the feet of peace."
As both Zacharias and Elizebeth walked before the Lord blameless, so they trained their son to do the same. When he undertook his mission, he was followed by crowds. He was the son of a priest. He was older than his cousin, Jesus. There were no question about who John's father was. Yet when he saw the Spirit descend like a dove and remain on Jesus, John declared for all to hear: "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!" (Jn 1:29) When Jesus began to gain more followers than John, John felt no remorse, envy, or jealousy. "He must increase, but I must decrease." (Jn 3:30) John was truly more than the physical son of his parents; in that he followed the way in which they had trained him, he was their spiritual heir as well.
The same dynamic of training and obedience in Gods Word leading to Holy Spirit formation and transformation is available to all of Christ's followers and their families. God doesn't just hope we seek this dynamic, He demands it of us, both as disciples and as parents, training our children to be disciples. Both parents are important, but on this Father's Day, this message is for you fathers. Your importance in forming your child's spiritual development cannot be over estimated. Studies show that if a father refuses to attend Church, that father's children will likely follow his example, even if the mother does attend and bring the children when they are young. Some Christians think the Evangelical Church has been looking inward at the expense of the rest of the world through the Church's focus on fostering healthy, two parent families. Yet it is the two parent family that brings the stability that makes the ills of society less likely to occur. Government programs have fostered a culture of "fatherlessness" and have caused society much pain and instability. It is interesting that some within the Church have condemned movements such as Promise Keepers for creating a "militant male" syndrome among Evangelical men. Yet these groups want nothing more than for fathers to fulfill the role ordained for them by God.
Fathers, if you will learn and obey God's Word, and if you will raise your children to not only know Scripture but follow its commands, DOING ALL IN FAITH, then your children will rightly consider you one with that "cloud of witnesses" Hebrews 12:1 speaks of, whose example inspires all of Christ's disciples to "lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God." (Heb 12: 1-2)
(All Quotes from Scripture are from the NKJV)
Monday, June 15, 2009
Monday Morning Devotions
Jn 7: 1-9 "After these things Jesus walked in Galilee; for he did not want to walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill Him. Now the Jews' Feast of Tabernacles was at hand. His brothers therefore said to Him, 'Depart from here and go into Judea, that Your disciples also may see the works that you are doing. For no one does anything in secret while he himself seeks to be known openly. If You do these things, show Yourself to the world.' For even His brothers did not believe in Him. Then Jesus said to them, 'My time has not yet come, but your time is always ready. The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil. You go up to this feast, for my time has not fully come.' When he had said these things to them, He remained in Galilee." (NKJV)
At first glance, this may seem to be an odd passage to choose for a devotional piece. Yet reading this passage one day, the truth that God can transform anyone was brought home to me again. And what does this passage have to do with God transforming lives?
This passage states that Jesus avoided Judea because of threats against His life. Yet His own brothers, who did not believe in Him, encouraged Him not only to travel there, but to show Himself openly. Surely they were not ignorant about threats to their brother's safety in Judea. They had to know what would happen if He did as they suggested. If this was indeed the case, then why did they want to place their own brother in jeopardy?
It would not have been easy being the brother of Jesus. After all, Jesus did indeed testify against the world, that its deeds were evil. He labeled the religious establishment "a brood of vipers." He chased the money changers out of the Temple. He healed on the Sabbath. He claimed the Father and He were one. For these things, the religious leaders sought to kill Him. The Pharisees in Jerusalem sent out agents of inquiry to question Jesus Himself. Surely they must have investigated His family as well. This must have put pressure on His brothers. After all, being a relative of one labeled a threat to the establishment could make one feel threatened. Fear can cause relatives to turn on each other. If the brothers of Jesus could permanently remove Him from the scene, their lives would have not only returned to normal, but they could have gained the favor of the religious leaders. So they tried to convince Jesus to expose Himself to mortal danger.
This is speculation to be sure. Yet I believe that even though the text does not explicitly declare the brothers' intentions were murderous, nevertheless, their murderous intentions are strongly implied. Just think of it. Christ's brothers were closer to Him in terms of blood than Judas, yet they were as ready to deliver Jesus to His enemies as Judas was.
Yet also think on this. The very same brothers who wanted Jesus dead were with their mother Mary and the Disciples praying in the Upper Room, praying with one accord after their brother's Ascension. (Acts 1:14) And at least two of those brothers, James and Jude, not only became disciples of Jesus, but shepherds of the Church flock, writing pastoral advice that would one day become part of God's Word. James, who once felt the pressure from being the brother of Jesus, would counsel others on how to endure trials and temptations as a follower of Jesus. And Jude, in his magnificent benediction, could write of Christ's ability to present His followers faultless before the Father. After all, his own brother lived in his own heart through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This indwelling transformed Jude from a fearful brother into a faithful follower. And Christ, if He lives in you through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, can transform you as He did His own brothers. That is, if you exercise your faith to let Him transform you.
At first glance, this may seem to be an odd passage to choose for a devotional piece. Yet reading this passage one day, the truth that God can transform anyone was brought home to me again. And what does this passage have to do with God transforming lives?
This passage states that Jesus avoided Judea because of threats against His life. Yet His own brothers, who did not believe in Him, encouraged Him not only to travel there, but to show Himself openly. Surely they were not ignorant about threats to their brother's safety in Judea. They had to know what would happen if He did as they suggested. If this was indeed the case, then why did they want to place their own brother in jeopardy?
It would not have been easy being the brother of Jesus. After all, Jesus did indeed testify against the world, that its deeds were evil. He labeled the religious establishment "a brood of vipers." He chased the money changers out of the Temple. He healed on the Sabbath. He claimed the Father and He were one. For these things, the religious leaders sought to kill Him. The Pharisees in Jerusalem sent out agents of inquiry to question Jesus Himself. Surely they must have investigated His family as well. This must have put pressure on His brothers. After all, being a relative of one labeled a threat to the establishment could make one feel threatened. Fear can cause relatives to turn on each other. If the brothers of Jesus could permanently remove Him from the scene, their lives would have not only returned to normal, but they could have gained the favor of the religious leaders. So they tried to convince Jesus to expose Himself to mortal danger.
This is speculation to be sure. Yet I believe that even though the text does not explicitly declare the brothers' intentions were murderous, nevertheless, their murderous intentions are strongly implied. Just think of it. Christ's brothers were closer to Him in terms of blood than Judas, yet they were as ready to deliver Jesus to His enemies as Judas was.
Yet also think on this. The very same brothers who wanted Jesus dead were with their mother Mary and the Disciples praying in the Upper Room, praying with one accord after their brother's Ascension. (Acts 1:14) And at least two of those brothers, James and Jude, not only became disciples of Jesus, but shepherds of the Church flock, writing pastoral advice that would one day become part of God's Word. James, who once felt the pressure from being the brother of Jesus, would counsel others on how to endure trials and temptations as a follower of Jesus. And Jude, in his magnificent benediction, could write of Christ's ability to present His followers faultless before the Father. After all, his own brother lived in his own heart through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This indwelling transformed Jude from a fearful brother into a faithful follower. And Christ, if He lives in you through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, can transform you as He did His own brothers. That is, if you exercise your faith to let Him transform you.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Clouds Of Witnesses: The Church Under Communist Domination
powered by Hipcast.com
This is a review of "The Gospel's Triumph Over Communism" by Michael Bourdeaux. Time: 7min., 56 sec. You will hear a couple coughs as I am getting over a cold. Audio entries do save time, yet my entries are still a bit awkward. From now on, even if the posts are not written down beforehand, I need to practice the delivery before I record the entry.
"Clouds of Witnesses" in the title above refers to a continuing series on this blog focused on the Church under persecution and biographies of saints past and present. It doesn't appear as much as it should, however, that is going to change. Soon articles will appear on such Christians as Brother Yun, Watchman Nee, David Wilkerson, Ann Judson, John Wesley, John Fletcher, Henry Martyn, Amy Charmichael and Phoebe Palmer, among many others.
This is a review of "The Gospel's Triumph Over Communism" by Michael Bourdeaux. Time: 7min., 56 sec. You will hear a couple coughs as I am getting over a cold. Audio entries do save time, yet my entries are still a bit awkward. From now on, even if the posts are not written down beforehand, I need to practice the delivery before I record the entry.
"Clouds of Witnesses" in the title above refers to a continuing series on this blog focused on the Church under persecution and biographies of saints past and present. It doesn't appear as much as it should, however, that is going to change. Soon articles will appear on such Christians as Brother Yun, Watchman Nee, David Wilkerson, Ann Judson, John Wesley, John Fletcher, Henry Martyn, Amy Charmichael and Phoebe Palmer, among many others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
