"I don't believe in magic"

We had talked a great deal about myths towards the end of the semester and how they were needed to give us a fuller understanding of the nature and character of a personal God. I had never questioned the place of "fairy tales", as Chesterton calls them, because I have always loved a good story. There was something stiring that I could never explain, there was an adventure that I longed to be a part of, or a vilian that I desperately wanted to expose. There were in stories imagination when I felt I had none and a course of action for when creativity got the whirlwind better of me.

"I don't like things that aren't real," said a family friend while she was over for a Christmas Eve greeting. "I don't like cartoons and I don't believe in magic." I think this conversation came up while discussing reading preferences. But having just been discussing with John Eldredge--in his book "Waking the Dead"--the importance of myth in our lives, I was a bit taken aback by how taken aback I was with her words. I asked her, "What about imagination? Isn't that a good thing?" "If it's real life stuff."
Dad chimmed in with, "C.S. Lewis wouldn't like you at all.".....To Be Continued

Ya know

Just thought I'd say something. Some thing.

I've got to get on the ball with this writing and posting all at the same time business. It's been a while since I've posted. Wait--it's been exactly a month...

Observation

(Rasselas by Samuel Johnson)
It is precisely the things that Rasselas and Nekayah envy in those whose example they seek that turns out to be the most burdensome to their prospective mentors. The very strengths desired turn into the most obvious weaknesses because the strengths are over emphasized--tipping the scales and obliterating balance. In all things, it is circumstance that is enviable. In all things, it is circumstance that is most cumbersome and wearying. There must be something more.

Chippin' Logs

(Thesis Forecasting and Discerning Soap-Boxes)

“Discernment is not a matter of simply telling the difference between right and wrong; rather, it is telling the difference between right and almost right.”

So said Spurgeon. The great church heresies of the middle ages were labeled as right “except”. In all great ecclesiastical undertakings the church has sought God’s wisdom in knowing where their error lies. The results were historical and covenantal declamations known as “credo” or creeds which means “I believe”.

Nothing can be orthodox save one point. Nothing can be true and followed by a “but”. Nothing can be right with any exceptions tagged on. Yet it’s so easy as Christians to point that out in the lives of others and well neigh look over the issues of our own hearts in which we fall so terribly short. It’s easy to see the blatantly evil in more of an objective light. It’s near impossible to apply such objectivity to the subject of ourselves.

Think of the speck Christ talks about in Matthew 7. It could actually just be the log in our own eye obscuring our vision and superimposing that speck into another’s eye.

I remember hearing some time back about a psychiatrist who said something to the effect that the reason a person commits a murder because they have had something in their background that they haven’t been able to cope with and they themselves want to die. Though obviously absurd, I think a similar view could be more accurately applied to the Matthew 7 scenario. The reason people are so eager to lash and point out the downfalls of others is because they see those same or worse short comings in themselves and seek to remedially clear their conscience.

Thus, we are almost right except. We’ve pointed out our brother’s abnormal wart and taken no heed to the tumor over our own hearts.

Deliberate Image

(Lecture, Reading, and Thoughts)

There is nothing God does without purpose.

We’ve been studying the “Jordanesque” way to pull a passage of Scripture apart by examining the details, following the footnote trails, and thus gain a broader view of God’s working continuity throughout history. The concept I’ve been wrestling most with as of late is the idea that everything man does is tied to some root ideology or belief.

In the eulogy written for his father, Andrew (?) Postman told of his dad’s deep love for his fellow man, his acknowledged need for community, and his selfless heart. Postman illustrated this by telling the story of family road trips and the fun they’d have at toll booths when his father would pay for the car behind them. The joy and humor it brought to the Postman family when down the road that car would pull up beside them and the occupants would either have an inquisitive look of confusion or an eagerly smiling wave of gratitude, that incident left an impression on a young boy who later saw it as a revealing of his father’s character.

Why did God choose the plagues He did to send upon the Egyptians? Why did He use the imagery of bondservant in context with the hope gospel? Why did He require blood from a particular sacrifice to be put on the right earlobe, right thumb, and right big toe of the priests? Why are there seven days of creation and seven bowl judgments?

If God, Who is above all, in all, and works through all, if God, who created all things but man specifically in His own image, if God works all things out deliberately, is it not right to assume that man too—as image bearer—has a deeper meaning and purpose for all things acted out. Granted, because the image has been distorted by man’s fall from grace, the deliberateness on man’s part is both perverted and often unconscious. But nevertheless, there is nothing man does without purpose. It is only under the grace of our Creator that such purpose can be redeemed to mirror, however dimly, the greater purposes of a deliberate God.

Jordanization Exercise

(Amos 3:12)

Thus says the LORD: “As the shepherd rescues from the mouth of the lion two legs, or a piece of an ear, so shall the people of Israel who dwell in Samaria be rescued, with the corner of a couch and part of a bed.” —Amos chapter 3, verse 12


Shepherd: High Priest, king, Christ, mediator

Lion’s Mouth: Satan and Judgment—Ps 22:21; II Tim 4:17; I Pt 5:8

Legs: Sacrifice—Ex 12:9; 29:17; Lev 4:11

Ear: Servitude and Sacrifice—Ex 21:6; Deut 15:17; Pro 25:12; Luke 22:50; Ex 29:20;
Lev 8:23; 14:14-17

Samaria: Capital of Northern Kingdom of Israel and Burial Place of the Kings—II Kings
13:13; 17:24-28

Couch—Rest and Comfort


Sarcastic Exasperation: Sacrifice—two legs and a piece of an ear. The legs were to be a burnt offering along with the head of the animal. Where are the ears? On the head. Where is the big toe that was to be tipped in blood along with the right ear lobe? On the foot. Where else have we seen foot—or more specifically, heel—imagery alongside head imagery? Genesis 3:15, of course, sets the precedent for this extended metaphor which separates the kingdom of man, under the ruling head of Satan, from the kingdom of God whose heirs will one day crush the head of the serpent.

How interesting it is that in sacrifices the head and legs together would be offered.
_ Other parallels between ear and legs:
~Hearers versus doers of the law/word (Rom 2:13; Js 1:22f)
~Implies action—putting feet to words

How much more interestinger is it that Nehemiah has a play on words for the Exodus 21:6 imagery of doulos: “Many years you BORE with them and warned them by your Spirit through your prophets. Yet they would not GIVE EAR.” (9:30)

Practical Application 201

(Jordanization of Life)

As I’ve been thinking through my Jordan reading and trying to make a Jordanizational application to Sunday night Teen Bible Study with the girls, I was
reminded of a particular exercise my high school English teacher had the class do. The point I have long since forgotten—I could take a few semi-educated stabs—but what I do remember is the following directions part. She brought in some sliced bread, a jar each of peanut butter and jelly, and a knife. One person was to explain to another the steps and procedure of making a PB&J, while the other was to follow those direction to the letter. It was a lot of fun to play with an extreme literalist taking orders from an extreme control freak!

So as I thought through Sunday’s lesson on I Peter 5 in light of what Wendy and I had talked to the girls about last week—taking each passage in context and paying heed to the details—I determined to go through the bread spreading exercise with the girls. I Peter deals a lot with authority and accountability, from ecclesiastical and civil to covenantal and marital, Peter ties them all together with the example of Christ’s bi-embodiment of leadership and submission. Since relating to and with authority happens on a daily basis, it is also a good example in and of itself for Peter’s address to suffering. He is constantly saying things like “do not be caught off guard”, “be prepared”, “be ready to give an account”, “do not be surprised” while at the same time exhorting them to honorable conduct, good deeds, unity of mind, brotherly love. He’s telling them to be prepared by keeping up the ordinary means of life. He’s urging them to continue in tenderness of heart and humility of mind, he’s reminding them to be self-controlled and sober-minded. He’s calling to mind the simplicity of covenant community by encouraging hospitality and the stewardship of gifts in useful service for the saints. To what end—“in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ”. These are the details that by skimming over cause us to misconstrue what we often take as the bigger picture. In this case the issues of authority and suffering were brought into such clearer light because I tend to over-spiritualize and hyper-analyze anything that looks to be a big picture idea in Scripture.

I brought a bag of bread, a jar each of peanut butter and jelly, along with a knife. All I said after explaining the exercise is, “I’m investing Rachel with the authority to give Meg directions on how to make a peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwich”. I didn’t say anything else as we all laughed hysterically at the end result—PB&J neatly spread all over the out side of the bread bag—but then every one shook there heads. “I see what God’s saying,” someone piped up. And I think it became a little clearer than jelly to me too.

Cognitive Dissident?: Gideon, Terry, and Judges

“As a ‘youth’ Gideon had been presented to us as one who provided the food of kings, bread and wine, to God’s people. He was a true servant, a man of real humility, oriented toward serving others and ruling them in that fashion. Now, however, he has forgotten this to an extent, and has begun to lord it over other men to some degree, however slight. Such is the tendency of the human heart.” --James Jordan (Judges, pg 156)

“He does not know himself well enough yet. He cannot fathom that he has violated Scripture, broken faith with the wife of his youth, broken faith with those he led into battle,...and broken faith with God Himself. He has robbed Almighty God of the glory He could have recieved as a result of the multitudinous gifts God deposited in Randall’s very person.” --Flip Benham (www.razormouth.com/archives/00000220.htm)

How? Why? They started out saying, and being, and doing all the right things. I don’t understand. I want to understand. Where do they go wrong?

Their families--I know, and love, and respect. If it can happen to them it could happen to any Christian, right? I know, I know--the grace of God can intervein and show us our errors. But why didn’t God intervien in their lives? They knew Him, loved Him, sacrificed and invested in His Kingdom--just like the rest of us. How did they get from there to here? What was the turning point? I don’t understand, and I want something more.

It’s more than just saying, “we’re all human” or “we shouldn’t put people on pedistals”. We can’t be suspect of everyone yet at the same time it’s great to have examples. But what happens when one day our examples are saying and doing things so very right and then their actions belie their words?

Have I always learned by example or have I been burnt enought times to where my skeptical reaction is to watch a person’s actions before I even think about listening to what he has to say.

Family Circus

I’m sitting here in my room thinking about how I’m so excited to be able to live with the Graysons. Wes King is playing in the background as I contemplate all the family lessons I’ll be able to glean for future application. Then I think about the Kings. There are really only three local families--and some day soon, four--whom I’d consider my most advantageous of familial mentors. As I thought about the Grants, the Graysons, the Kings--and soon the Wilburs--I realized that I’ve already gleaned so much from them. And the “apprensiceship approach” only seems brighter and more substantive in the future with each family.

As I was thinking I had to ask myself why I’m thinking about family so much as of late. I honestly have as much intrest in marriage and family as I did several years ago. So why am I allowing the notions to occupy so much of my mind? I came up with several things.

First of all--precisely because I have no intrest in marriage or family. I could say “nuff said” but I’ll elaborate. In I Peter 4, the apostle tells his people that the end is near and then he gives them exhortations to live godly lives, be sober-minded, and to continue practicing hospitality--basically, prepare yourselves but keep doing the ordinary every day things you’ve been doing. This paralleled his admonition in chapter three, “be ready to give an account”, as well as Peter’s theme through out his letter to not be caught off guard and be prepared. So, basically, precisely because I can’t see what lies ahead, because I don’t want to be caught off guard, and because God has placed the examples in my life now--while I’m not interested. The learning begins where the teachers are.

Secondly, because of the excuse I’ve had all along--conscious or subconscious--for why I’ve never wanted to get married. I never thought marriage worked. I’d revel in the fact that my parents marriage used to be so rocky. I’d wallow in thoughts of the divorce of my dad’s brother and pity his second sweet wife and two small kids for the self-centered childishness they have to endure. I’d remember with horror the nasty divorce of mom’s sister but then to happier thoughts of the wonderful man she’s married to now who was himself married three times before becoming a believer. My own mother is the product of a second marriage. All these “examples” swirl around inside my head but I’m lead to remember that one of these marriages didn’t end in divorce. Some how--by the grace of God--my parents (or rather my mother--those Shore boys!) stuck it out, and I was able to see and grow with them through that time.

Still, I’ve always been afraid that that would happen to me so I wanted to protect myself and my future children by having no future children and thus never getting married. Since I’ve gotten older, the stories of divorce have gotten more and more numerous in the lives of pastors, close friends, and prominant aquaintances. But I’m beginning to see that marriage can work, and that if it didn’t, God would not have sanctioned and sanctified it within the context of His covenant. It’s taken me a long time to acknowledge that point, now I just need to see how it works.

Thirdly, the reason I’ve had so many thoughts of marriage and family are because I long so desperately to know God more and to better understand His covenant with man. There is no better way than to watch covenant parents deliberately raise their covenant children in the ways of covenant faithfulness and covenant remembrance. The reason the children of Israel didn’t claim all of God’s best for them--the reason they fell into alliance with the very peoples and idols they were told to drive out--was because they neglected to pass the laws of God onto their children. With every passing generation the forgetfullness grew.
Now is the season for me to look for covenant succession in action. I’ve noticed two ways of teaching/learning the ways of God to children/men. One seems to be the way the Kings and Graysons take--which I could parallel to what Jordan calls “theology proper”. They begin with God, who He is, and what He has done and everything else points back to Him--daily life, application, worldview, playing with siblings, ect. The other is the schooling which I recieved some what through necessity and by default. That is, by beginning with example, beginning with the “everything else” and showing how that points back to the Creator and Giver of all things.

I suppose it depends on maturity and background as to which method of teaching a parent will take, but I’m still learning more by example than by principle. Because I had so much baggage that’s how I came to learn from Der. Because I have so much baggage that’s how I’m going to learn from those families God has placed in my life--Show me, because I’ve never seen it done before.

Lastly, at least I’m making this my last point. The reason I’m thinking so much about marriage and family is because everyone in the world is getting married this coming summer, I’m in a wedding, and I’m trying to get all my engaged friends through school with some level of concentration and focus.

“Nuff said.”

Practical Application 101

Yeah, so. Jordan's been rocking my world with all this "don't ignore the specific details" stuff and this "it's all about covenant" stuff. The things we--I--overlook and the reasons we--I--overlook them are completely, well, sad, shallow, and inconsistant. True it has made me want to slap myself and say "duh", but more than that I'm finding that my small burning ember of enlightenment is being stoked into this firely passion to connect more of the dots. And as I'm reaching that point, I'm also finding that--while I am taking such effort for my own hungering benefit--I'm wanting others to make these connections along with me. I'm wanting to go up to some one and say, "Walk with me. Let's see where this goes".

In light of that, practical application is needed--and consistant--in bringing these revelations both to further light and into use. Getting "back to the basics" and paying heed to the "specific details" are the things I'd like to work through and with my Bible Study girls on. What does this look like out of the class room where we talk "about" it, and how can I apply those two ideas by translating them into conviction and action? That will be the subject of thought over the next few days as I help wrap up our study in I Peter.