The drama goes on. You know, all that stuff about whether Katelynn, my eleven year old, can wear make-up. I have come to a tentative conclusion and it has to do with the fourth commandment. We will get to that in a moment.

Some people need to take a sabbath rest from going church. Just hang with me. I will get there too.

I don’t know about you, but I love Chick-fil-a. It is our families favorite place to each on a dime (or so). My youngest, Zach, is made purely of Chick-fil-a chicken nuggets and chocolate milk. It is amazing what the body can turn those two into. Chick-fil-a is not open on Sundays, so Zach justs practices his 3-year-old fast that day. I admire Chick-fil-a for not being open on Sunday. I think it is one good application of what it means to keep the Sabbath and make it holy.

For most people that I know, the obligation to keep the sabbath is either seen as null-and-void in the church age or it simply means that we “go to” church. If you hit Sunday School and “big church” you have done double duty! However, I don’t believe this captures the essence of the fourth commandment very well.

The fourth commandment is found in Exodus 20:

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” (Exo 20:8-11 ESV)

This commandment is one of the only commands that is tagged with an explanatory clause, helping us understand the reason for its institution. As the Lord rested on the seventh day of creation, so also we are to keep the Sabbath “holy.” The parallel here is between “rest” and “holy” in verse 11. They key here is that the Sabbath is set apart (i.e. “holy”) as a day of rest from our labors. The term “sabbath” translates the Hebrew sabbat (שבת), meaning “to cease.”

As I said before, many people believe that this is the only one of the Ten Commandments that does not have an abiding moral principle, being completely fulfilled in Christ. While I agree that Christ is our Sabbath rest (Heb. 3:9-11) in that he fulfilled the Law and we have rest from our labors, I don’t think that Christ’s fulfillment takes away from the principles being expressed that are truly eternal. We still need to take breaks . .  and a whole lot more.

Christ made it clear that the Sabbath was created for man (Mark 2:27). Paul makes it clear that no one is to become legalistic about when we take a sabbath (Col. 2:16).  

Today, in our industrialized world, we have much more opportunity for rest then did the Israelites in the Old Testament times. Their labor was a sweaty field labor. Most of the time it was hand to mouth. As well, it lasted from sunrise to sunset. And we think we have it hard! For them the dictum was: ”Don’t work today, don’t eat today.” It was that simple. In our western world, we normally work from 8am-5pm and take two days off! Continue Reading »

Got Theology? Everything starts next week.

What does it mean to use the Lord’s name in vain? This is a question that might seem self-evident to most people in western society. Whether you are religious or not, you would not even hesitate with your answer, “It means to say ‘G D’.” I am sure that there are more people that can answer this than there are who can list the ten commandments, name the Gospels, or tell you the difference between the New Testament and the Old Testament. For this reason, I thought that I would try to contribute to this discussion by asking the question “What does it really mean to take the Lord’s name in vain?”

Obviously, I am going to say something that is at odds with the common conception among those of us who grew up in the context of our western Judeo-Christian culture, otherwise I would not have included the word “really,” and put it in italics! The reader must also be warned that I am going to use a phrase that is very offensive to many. I am assuming that I am dealing with a mature audience who understands the intentionality that I bring to this blog. If what I am proposing here is correct, we all need to hear this in order to overcome a serious issue of folk theology that damages the character of God and misrepresents what it means to talk in a “Christian” manner.

For most, the ultimate violation of the third commandment, “You shall not take the Lord your God’s name in vain,” is to say “God damn it.” You can use just about every other word or phrase, no matter how bad, but when your vulgarity includes the utilization of this phrase, many would believe that you have crossed the line. You might even be charged with blasphemy. Some people will stand before God and when asked “Why should I let you in to heaven?” will proudly say, “Because I did not murder, commit adultery, and I never said the ‘G D’ word.” (Please note, I don’t think God is going to ask that question. Don’t go there.)

I believe we have this wrong. In fact, from a purely objective standpoint, I don’t believe that this phrase causes God to bat an eye whatsoever. Think about it this way for a moment. Why would calling on God to damn something be so bad? What does the verb “damn” mean? The American Heritage Dictionary defines the verb ”to damn” as “the act of pronouncing an adverse judgement upon.” To call upon God to damn something is neither sinful nor unbiblical. In fact, you can find people throughout Scripture, especially in the imprecatory Psalms, who call upon God to bring judgement on their enemies. In other words, they are asking for God to damn those who they feel are ripe for His judgement. In this sense, saying “God damn you” can be as biblical as saying “God bless you.”

Some may say to me the reason why this is a violation of the third commandment is because people are using God’s name in a “vain,” “worthless,” or “empty” way. In this case, to say “God damn it!” in our colloquial tongue is not the same as seriously calling upon God to damn something or someone in a biblical sense. For these people, if you say it with the biblical meaning, fine, but if you say it casually, then you have used His name in an “empty” way and thereby have broken the third commandment.

But there are three major problems with this line of reasoning:  Continue Reading »

I have been conducting seminars on the history of the English Bible for the past dozen years. Inevitably, I get questions like, “What’s the most literal translation out there?” “What’s a good study Bible?” “Which Bible is the most accurate?” “What’s a good Bible for a new Christian to get?”

These are excellent questions. I will try to offer some guidelines here for the general English-speaking reader of the Bible, though it will be necessarily brief.

Let me start with two assumptions. First, your native tongue is English. Second, you live in a country whose native tongue—or one of them—is English (e.g., United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand). Obviously, not everyone reading this blog post will qualify, but these are the folks that I am addressing.

There are far more translations of the Bible into English than any other language on the planet. There are historical reasons for this, but we won’t go into them—except to say this: English-speaking countries for the most part have a broadly Christian culture as part of their heritage. To be sure, all are living in a post-Christian age now, but a large part of the heritage of that culture involves the Bible and Christianity. The influence of the Bible on the English-speaking world is absolutely stunning. It permeates almost every nook and cranny of our society, even if not intentionally so. E. D. Hirsch’s Cultural Literacy (1988) has a 60+ page appendix of words and phrases that every literate American ought to know. It’s amazing how many words and phrases are right out of the Bible and Christian thought.

Or consider the other end of the cultural continuum, pop music. Some of the best known rock songs, especially from the 60s and 70s, have allusions to the Bible and Christianity. Led Zeppelin’s Stairway to Heaven, for example, speaks of “stairway to heaven” (of course!), “there are two paths you can go,” “our soul… the truth will come to you”; Don McLean’s American Pie: “do you have faith in God?”, “can music save your mortal soul?”, “If the Bible tells you so…,” “while the King was looking down the Jester stole his thorny crown,” “Fire is the devil’s only friend,” “no angel born in hell could break that satan’s spell,” “the three men I admire most: the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost…”; Steppenwolf’s The Pusher: “God damn the Pusher,” “I’d declare total war on the Pusher man…I’d kill him with my Bible…”

Whether one is a Christian, non-Christian, or anti-Christian, the Bible is a book that has infected our culture and the way we communicate.

So, what’s the best Bible to get? There’s no simple answer to this question. I will instead offer three or four categories of Bibles that every English-speaking Christian should own. Continue Reading »

Recently, I have been confronted with some rather significant decisions.  As one who is committed to Christ as Lord and Savior, naturally these are things I have brought to God in prayer, looking for his will and guidance.  At the same time, I have had to think through ramifications of varying options and scenarios and gauge what is the reasonable thing to do given what I believe is consistent with the witness of scripture and the place where God has me currently situated.  In short, I have confronted these decisions prayerfully, with the voice of reason.

Now some might object and believe that we need to rely on what God tells us to do.  That relying on reason and engaging our mental faculties is the same as relying on human wisdom and understanding apart from the spiritual understanding that comes from divine direction.  After all, doesn’t Proverbs 3:5 indicate to not lean to our own understanding, but acknowledge the Lord in all our ways?  Most certainly it does.  But I don’t think that means that engaging in a thought process involving reason is not engaging spiritual guidance.  In fact, I am convinced that God very much operates through reason, too.

As Christians, we are told in Romans 12:2 to not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing our minds.   Conformity to the world involves a mindset of identity.   Prior to regeneration, the believer can only follow the mindset that does not set affections on God or his ways (Ephesians 2:1-3; Romans 8:7).  It relies on a philosophy of the pattern of this world, which is keeping with human understanding and that which is sourced in self-interest.  The renewed mind understands that life decisions must be filtered through a new lens.  We are subject to a different standard that is keeping with who we are as citizens of heaven, indwelt with the Holy Spirit who provides illumination on how to bring life into alignment with God’s will and ways.  So as we think about life and all of its decisions, we should be in touch with that identity and what is in its best interest.

It does raise the question of how the Holy Spirit works in the faculties of the believer.  Does the Holy Spirit provide guidance by bypassing our thought process and just mechanically gives us answers and directives?   Or does the Holy Spirit invade the mind and influence our thoughts so that they align with the will of God?  I suppose that answer will rest on where one stands on the composition of our humanity, whether dichotomist (body and soul/spirit) or trichotomist (body, soul and spirit).   I also wonder that if we take the position that the Holy Spirit speaks to us separate from our mental faculties, if that means we are responsible for some decisions but God is responsible for others.  That does present some difficulties that I can’t even wrap my mind around at the moment.

I honestly believe that adopting the mentality that divine guidance must come through that ’small still voice’ or some other form of receiving a direct answer can be counter-productive to an authentic Christian life that must confront decisions on a daily basis – big and small.  I am not saying that God does not operate that way or there aren’t ‘impressions’ that are convictions of a direction that God would have us take.   But he did give us mental faculties to use that should be used to honor him.  If he just gave us the answer, how then would we grow and make choices that demonstrate our love for him?  Moreover, the fact that convictions come in the form of thoughts, I believe makes for a compelling case that the Holy Spirit very much works through out mental faculties, which we then should use for the glory of God in the decisions that we make.  In fact, I am of the opinion that the voice we ascribe to God speaking can actually be the Holy Spirit bearing on our own thoughts, which is what we may possibly hear.

If we are just listening to the voice separate from any type of mental engagement, then what is to prevent someone who is mentally challenged with proclivities towards distorted thought processes from declaring some divine directive that is nothing more than a product of that distortion?  I do believe that God can work through mental illness but that doesn’t prevent the impact that misunderstood and misapplied guidance can have those who are subject to that decision.  In fact, I have encountered ministries that I believe were either founded upon the spiritual leadership or run by someone who was mentally unstable.  As one who is not trained in this area, I can only speculate but I would bet money that this is far more prevalent than we probably think.

If the Holy Spirit can operate through the voice of reason, I suspect that the conscience very much plays a role in this facilitation.  The NT writers use the word conscience  (συνειδησις) 29 times and is associated with an inward conviction that aligns with a mindset that our thoughts, words or actions are consistent with our identity as believers in Christ.   The Greek-English lexicon (BDAG) renders the meaning of the word as “an inward faculty of distinguishing right and wrong”.   A few examples are here

Romans 2:15 – in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them.

1 Corinthians 8:10 – For if someone sees you, who have knowledge, dining in an idol’s temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be strengthened to eat things sacrificed to idols?

2 Corinthians 5:11 – Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade men, but we are made manifest to God; and I hope that we are made manifest also in your consciences.

Hebrews 9:14 – how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

It seems that everywhere conscience is used, it denotes that inward conviction that must bear on our decisions but nowhere denies the existence of decisions or having to think through what is the reasonable and God-honoring thing to do.  But several of the verses where ‘conscience’ is used indicates the need to keep it clear (Acts 23:1; 24:9; 1 Timothy 1:5, 19; 3:9; 2 Timothy 1:3; Hebrews 10:22; 1 Peter 3:16).  It’s why I believe Paul warns that the spiritually wayward will have a seared conscience (1 Timothy 4:2) that prevents subjection to God and his ways and how it can distort decisions we make.

So the bottom line is that I don’t think we should fear the voice of reason or relegate to a product of non-spiritual human understanding.  If our thoughts are filtered through the grid of prayer, scripture and an attitude of subjection to Christ, I believe the Holy Spirit can use them to align with the very direction that God would have us take as we think through what to do.

1. Wondering what Rhome has been doing? You can see here: Sacra Script Ministries

Quick shout out to my partner in crime.

2. Ever seen Enjoying God Ministries?

Many of you know that Sam Storms is a new host on Theology Unplugged with Tim and I. Enjoying God Ministries is his ministry. It is a wonderful resource for your studies.

3. Biblemap.com

I bet you did not know that this site was completely conceived and created by Tim Kimberly of Reclaiming the Mind Ministries. There is a reason why I have been trying to get this guy to join us since 2004!

4. Rob Kashow writes about “Why Confessional Institutions Are Problematic”

Interesting read. But don’t miss Dan Wallace’s response in the comments where he says, “[C]onfessional and non-confessional schools in America are often mirror images of each other, except that the starting presuppositions of one are decidedly different from those of the other.”

5. Just in case you missed our latest newsletter, here is a link

5. Just got this new book: The Passionate Intellect: Christian Faith and the Discipleship of the Mind

I get read everything McGrath writes. I think that this might be our next book of the month.

6. Speaking of the Reclaiming the Mind “Book of the Month Club” . . .

Support our ministry by selecting $100 a month reoccurring donation and receive a new theology book every month. We would really appreciate your partnership!

7. Scot McKnight moved again

Good move from Beliefnet to Patheos.

8. Boomer . . .

9. The best looking cookie I have ever seen

Mike and Diane Garrett who are part of The Theology Program in Cypress, TX finished up their semester with a celebration. After taking Trinitarianism (the third course of The Theology Program), they had a party and made this cookie.

One thing they said was that they did not know how to divide the essence of the Trinity! I don’t know if they ever cut it (or even could).

If you would like us to mention your blog or article on TAWi60, send your request to blog@reclaimingthemind.org. No guarantees, but I will do my best.

Join C. Michael Patton and Tim Kimberley as they discuss Stephen Hawking’s recent claims regarding the origins of the universe

 

 Stephen Hawking and the Unknown God [31:09m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Other ways to get TUP:

If you have not already seen, you may be interested to know that Stephen Hawking, the brilliant British theoretical physicist and cosmologist who has never been a friend to Christianity, has made an announcement: the universe came into being from nothing. There is no God.

Of course we have all be sitting on pins and needles waiting for such a definitive announcement, right? This information comes from his new book The Grand Design, his first major work in nearly a decade (to be released later this month). What makes this information news, I suppose, is that before this announcement, Hawking could have been labeled as an agnostic with quasi-deistic sympathies. In other words, if Hawking allowed for a God, it was not one like the Christian God and he/she/it was certainly not interested in the going-ons here on earth. ”The universe,” according to Hawking, ”is governed by the laws of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws” (source). In other words, no miracles, no transcendent love, and no God becoming man. How he was privy to the information that “God does not intervene” is for his eyes only.

However, as I said, there has been a change. Hawking seems to have figured it out. In his new book he says that “Spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.” He goes on, “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper [fuse] and set the universe going.”

But I don’t get it. Aren’t we as rational being supposed to be rational? Is it really rational to say that something comes from nothing. What about the axiom, ex nihilo nihil fit, “out of nothing, nothing comes.” What if this “spontaneous generation” answer was permissible in our every day life? Me: “Will, who made this mess in your room?” Will: “Ummm…no one. It just appeared from nothing.” Fireman: “How did this fire start? Man: “It was just one of those things. Nothing started it.” Policeman: “Who robbed the bank.” Robber: “No one. The money is just gone and nothing caused it to go.”

As irrational as this “something from nothing” philosophy is in the real world, it cannot and should not get a better shake when it comes to religion. People often ask, “If God created everything who or what created God?” Many times we just stare with a blank look on their face, not knowing how to respond. However, we do have a response. It is called transcendence.

(Hang with me, I will get back to the Hawking kind of faith thing in a moment.)

We believe in a transcendent God. This is what we call a ”necessary” belief. “If something exists,” so the argument goes, “God must exist.” It is actually the best argument for God that is out there. If something exists, we have to have an adequate cause to explain it. This cause must be transcendent in order to avoid the infinite regress produced by the “If God created everything, who created God? Who created that which created God? Who created that which created that which created God?” You see, there must be an “ultimate cause.” This is called the “unmoved mover.” Because of the law of cause and effect (every effect has an sufficient cause) and because we know that time cannot go infinitely backward (or we would never reach the present because we would always have an infinity to go), we know that the “universe” in which God resides, must transcend the physical laws of our universe. Continue Reading »

I don’t think the decision on whether we watch a movie is as simple as asking whether it has drugs, alcohol, sex, cursing, or evil behavior in it. But I am already getting ahead of myself . . .

I remember when I was a pastor at Stonebair Community Church. There was this lady that was trying to get her foot in the door of the church to hold a seminar on the dangers of Harry Potter. This is when the movie was first coming out and everyone was already reading the books. She attempted to tell us about the sorcery and witchcraft that was in it and how it was not a good movie for kids. We sent her on her way (to the church down the street!). There were simply bigger fish to fry. (Besides, I think we were all going to watch Harry Potter that night.)

One of the things that I believe is that culture is “amoral.” What I mean by that is that we need to be careful when we talk about the Christianity and the culture. Often the way we talk about it is in terms of Christianity vs. the culture or Christianity vs. the world. Culture is amoral in that in-and-of itself, it is not good or evil. It can exhibit traits of either. The world is not evil. The world without God (which is what we often mean) is evil because it is in rebellion toward God. But culture can be, and often is, a very good thing. Entertainment, arts, music, technology, government, and the like can be used for good or evil.

Take movies for instance. In so many ways, Hollywood can be a gift from God. The expression of creativity, instigation of laughter, and the opening of the imagination is a God glorifying venture. However, very often it can be a tool for evil, transforming worldviews by the powers of entertainment. An ancient Greek philosopher once said (and I paraphrase), “You can have the government, military, and schools, but give me the music and I control the people.” I have a feeling that today the this same philosopher would say the same thing about Hollywood. There is so much power there.

I love movies. Probably too much. Definitely too much. I always think about whether something is beneficial or not. I am continually asking if such and such movie is promoting good or evil. I often don’t know. However, I have come up with three rules of thumb that I use in evaluation. This is especially helpful when it comes to what I will let my kids watch.

Forgive my acronym, but it fits: CAN. You know…as in “Can I watch this daddy?”

Before I list them, understand that these three are in relation to sinful behavior in entertainment. The question is not simply does the movie contain sinful behavior (which is often where we stop), but does it have sinful behavior in relation to these three.

Celebrated
Accessible
Normalized Continue Reading »

My daughter, Katelynn, who is eleven, wants to start wearing make-up. I have a rule: No make-up at all until she is twelve. My wife does not agree with me. She thinks I am being legalistic. I can’t help it. That is just the way I think. I can justify it in ten different ways with my hands tied behind my back. The problem is that none of my justification is really black or white. It is one of those things that the Scripture does not speak on. My wife’s argument makes sense too. However, I have scruples about the issue. These scruples bend my understanding and create their own passions. One more year and the scruples will be gone as Katelynn will be twelve.

Make-up is not the issue. I don’t want to go there. We all have scruples. That is not really a technical theological term, though it is in the dictionary. This is how it is defined: “An uneasy feeling arising from conscience or principle that tends to hinder action.” However, when it comes to our faith, scruples are hard to deal with. You have these militating  terms: grace and liberty.

When grace and liberty clash with “scruples,” more often than not, unfortunately, the scruples win. Why? Because we are so quick to sacrifice our liberty for the sake of the “weaker brethren.” Yes, this “weaker brethren” card is often pulled and legalists love it. In fact, it is used most often by those who are legalist wearing the disguise of those who are free. It is not that this card is illegitimate—it is not as if there are not true weaker brethren—but it is abused and the result is slavery.

I remember Chuck Swindoll talking about this saying: “Be careful, there are some people out there who are ‘professional weaker brethren.’”

“Kristie, I have scruples with this make-up thing. Maybe I cannot find a verse or a solid principle upon which to rest my theological head, but you need to be sensitive  and understanding to my hang-ups for the sake of my spirituality. One more year and my scruples will be gone.”

I highlighted some key words that legalists will use to manipulate the situation. “Sensitive,” “understanding,” “hang-ups,” “sake,” and most importantly, “my.”

From the other side, liberty is so often sacrificed.

“I don’t go to the movies because I don’t want to cause anyone to stumble.”

Often implied translation: “You should give up your liberty too if you want to be spiritual like me.”

“I don’t ever drink alcohol because a weaker brethren might see me and fall into sin.”

Often implied translation: “I have scruples with this issue and you should too.”

“If someone saw me befriending this person, they may think I am condoning their actions. Therefore, I sacrifice my liberty for the sake of their frailty.”

Often implied translation: “I can’t be friends with people who are that sinful.”

Okay, to the passage: Romans 14. Continue Reading »