Packer does not leave us in the middle of a road without a map, as it were, when it comes to the study of God. For after he gives us good reason to study God and to consider it as worthwhile (and logical, for a sane person who has resources readily available to do so), he outlines the basic themes that he proposes we use as the outline for our study:
"We shall have to deal with the Godhead of God, the qualities of deity which set God apart from humans and mark the difference and distance between the Creator and His creatures...
"We shall have to deal with the powers of God: His almightiness, his omniscience, his omnipresence. We shall have to deal with the perfections of God, the aspects of his moral character which are manifested in His words and deeds...
"We shall have to take note of what pleases Him, what offends Him, what awakens His wrath, what affords Him satisfaction and joy." (Knowing God, copyright 1973 by J.I. Packer, Text Americanized and completely retypeset in 1993, Published in the USA by InterVarsity Press.)
But it's Packer's next statement that resonates within my mind as being so true and yet at the same time so sad:
"For many of us, these are comparatively unfamiliar themes. They were not always so to the people of God. There was a time when the subject of God's attributes (as it was called) was thought so important as to be included in the catechism which all children in the churches were taught and all adult members were expected to know. Thus, to the fourth question in the Westminster Shorter Catechism, 'What is God?' the answer read as follows: 'God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.'...
"Few children today, however, are brought up on the Westminster Shorter Catechism, and few modern worshipers will ever have heard a series of sermons covering the doctrine of the divine character in the way that Charnock's massive Discourses on the Existence and Attributes of God (1682) did. Few, too, will ever have read anything simple and straightforward on the subject of the nature of God, for scarcely any such writing exists at the present time..." (page 21).
Thanks to God's use of J.I. Packer (and, I might add, several others like him who likewise bless us in these present times, including R.C. Sproul and John Piper), there are now writings on the subject of the nature of God which are simple and straightforward (without being simplistic or inaccurate) -- may we not fail to take full advantage of their availability to us!
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Soul... Knowing God, Day 2 -- Who Needs Theology?
In the first part of his chapter entitled "The Study of God" (chapter one of his book "Knowing God"), J.I. Packer begins by examining the reasons to (properly) study God. He answers a hypothetical questioner, who is asking why a series of studies on the nature and character of God are really necessary and worthwhile, in the following manner:
"The questioner clearly assumes that a study of the nature and character of God will be impractical and irrelevant for life. In fact, howeer, it is the most practical project anyone can engage in. Knowing about God is crucially important for the living of our lives. As it would be cruel to an Amazonian tribesman to fly him to London, put him down without explanation in Trafalgar Square and leave him, as one who knew nothing of English or England, to fend for himself, so we are cruel to ourselves if we try to live in this world without knowing about the God Whose world it is and Who runs it. The world becomes a strange, mad, painful place, and life in it a disappointing and unpleasant business, for those who do not know about God" (page 19, emphasis added by me in bold text).
Packer goes on to warn us that, though the study of God is worthwhile, we must start by "setting out in a storm", plugging our ears to the slogans and inaccuracies of the so-called debate about God, which asks us to buy into the lie that "knowledge about God is strictly a nonentity. Types of teaching which profess such knowledge are written off as outmoded -- 'Calvinism,' 'fundamentalism,' 'Protestant scholasticism,' 'the old orthodoxy'." (Page 19.)
Studying God in spirit and in truth, according to His Word, means that we are, after all, pursuing the Holy One of the universe, on His terms, in obedience to His commands -- what journey could be more worthy of our persistence, no matter what we are accused of or called?
"The questioner clearly assumes that a study of the nature and character of God will be impractical and irrelevant for life. In fact, howeer, it is the most practical project anyone can engage in. Knowing about God is crucially important for the living of our lives. As it would be cruel to an Amazonian tribesman to fly him to London, put him down without explanation in Trafalgar Square and leave him, as one who knew nothing of English or England, to fend for himself, so we are cruel to ourselves if we try to live in this world without knowing about the God Whose world it is and Who runs it. The world becomes a strange, mad, painful place, and life in it a disappointing and unpleasant business, for those who do not know about God" (page 19, emphasis added by me in bold text).
Packer goes on to warn us that, though the study of God is worthwhile, we must start by "setting out in a storm", plugging our ears to the slogans and inaccuracies of the so-called debate about God, which asks us to buy into the lie that "knowledge about God is strictly a nonentity. Types of teaching which profess such knowledge are written off as outmoded -- 'Calvinism,' 'fundamentalism,' 'Protestant scholasticism,' 'the old orthodoxy'." (Page 19.)
Studying God in spirit and in truth, according to His Word, means that we are, after all, pursuing the Holy One of the universe, on His terms, in obedience to His commands -- what journey could be more worthy of our persistence, no matter what we are accused of or called?
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Soul... Knowing God, Day 1 -- Preface (1973)
"Knowing God", by J.I. Packer (copyright 1973 by J.I. Packer, published in the U.S.A. by InterVarsity Press, Americanized and retypeset in 1993) is not the best book that I've read after the Bible. It is the second -- Packer's "Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God" was the best for me, in terms of thoughtfulness on the part of the author and impact on my life. However, "Knowing God" has a much greater breadth and scope, in that it examines (respectfully and worshipfully!) many of the characteristics and aspects of God Himself, along with practical advice for the means to know Him.
As I study "Knowing God" for the third time (this time for an "accelerated" 8-week study at church), I found it helpful to highlight certain portions of this collection of amazing and helpful insights, and so I want to start including them here.
Reading the "preface" to books seems to be mostly a matter of habit for many readers -- I know several readers who do not feel they've read a book completely until they've read it cover to cover, including the preface, while many others normally skip it. Packer's preface from 1973 is not to be missed, for in it he shares his reasons behind writing "Knowing God".
On page 12, Packer states that "The conviction behind the book is that ignorance of God -- ignorance both of His ways and of the practice of communion with Him -- lies at the root of much of the church's weakness today", and he goes on to identify two "unhappy trends" which "seem to have produced this state of affairs."
The first trend that Packer identifies is "that Christian minds have been conformed to the modern spirit: the spirit, that is, that spawns great thoughts of man and leaves room for only small thoughts of God" (my emphasis added in bold text). Part of the effects of this trend is that "churchmen who look at God, so to speak, through the wrong end of the telescope, so reducing Him to pygmy proportions, cannot hope to end up as more than pygmy Christians...".
Why do we not yearn for more, or at least fervently plead (as David did) for God's grace in making us yearn after Him? This is a futile question, I'm afraid, and a disappointing line of thought, for those who do not hunger and thirst after that which is truly good will have no desire to ask to hunger and thirst!
The second trend, Packer says, "is that Christian minds have been confused by the modern skepticism. For more than three centuries the naturalistic leaven in the Renaissance outlook has been working like a cancer in Western thought. Seventeenth-century Arminians and deists, like sixteeth-century Socinians, came to deny, as against Reformation theology, that God's control of His world was either direct or complete, and theology, philosophy, and science have for the most part combined to maintain that denial ever since" (page 13; my emphasis added in bold text).
This second trend strikes me as being similar to, or perhaps even the cause of, the pervasive "evolutionary" world-view which so many people (sadly, including many who might be Christians) now profess and even defend. Once we make God remote, or better yet, dependent on and "internal" to each individual, then we have little trouble pleasing ourselves -- after all, if God is relative and His works are easily explained (and if He is gentle, meek, and mild, "patiently waiting" for me to "invite Him to come in") then I have little trouble justifying any sort of compromise or even godlessness that seems right (or best suited for my purposes) to me at the time!
Enough said until Day 2...
As I study "Knowing God" for the third time (this time for an "accelerated" 8-week study at church), I found it helpful to highlight certain portions of this collection of amazing and helpful insights, and so I want to start including them here.
Reading the "preface" to books seems to be mostly a matter of habit for many readers -- I know several readers who do not feel they've read a book completely until they've read it cover to cover, including the preface, while many others normally skip it. Packer's preface from 1973 is not to be missed, for in it he shares his reasons behind writing "Knowing God".
On page 12, Packer states that "The conviction behind the book is that ignorance of God -- ignorance both of His ways and of the practice of communion with Him -- lies at the root of much of the church's weakness today", and he goes on to identify two "unhappy trends" which "seem to have produced this state of affairs."
The first trend that Packer identifies is "that Christian minds have been conformed to the modern spirit: the spirit, that is, that spawns great thoughts of man and leaves room for only small thoughts of God" (my emphasis added in bold text). Part of the effects of this trend is that "churchmen who look at God, so to speak, through the wrong end of the telescope, so reducing Him to pygmy proportions, cannot hope to end up as more than pygmy Christians...".
Why do we not yearn for more, or at least fervently plead (as David did) for God's grace in making us yearn after Him? This is a futile question, I'm afraid, and a disappointing line of thought, for those who do not hunger and thirst after that which is truly good will have no desire to ask to hunger and thirst!
The second trend, Packer says, "is that Christian minds have been confused by the modern skepticism. For more than three centuries the naturalistic leaven in the Renaissance outlook has been working like a cancer in Western thought. Seventeenth-century Arminians and deists, like sixteeth-century Socinians, came to deny, as against Reformation theology, that God's control of His world was either direct or complete, and theology, philosophy, and science have for the most part combined to maintain that denial ever since" (page 13; my emphasis added in bold text).
This second trend strikes me as being similar to, or perhaps even the cause of, the pervasive "evolutionary" world-view which so many people (sadly, including many who might be Christians) now profess and even defend. Once we make God remote, or better yet, dependent on and "internal" to each individual, then we have little trouble pleasing ourselves -- after all, if God is relative and His works are easily explained (and if He is gentle, meek, and mild, "patiently waiting" for me to "invite Him to come in") then I have little trouble justifying any sort of compromise or even godlessness that seems right (or best suited for my purposes) to me at the time!
Enough said until Day 2...
Friday, April 17, 2009
Soul... Warning Signs
I realize that there are lots of folks reading Christian fiction these days, which is certainly not a bad thing considering most of the alternatives (and since most any fiction or music that is fairly clean gets labeled, or at least embraced, as "Christian". I saw a display for an entirely secular tweeny-bopper movie in a Christian book-store a couple of weeks ago because it has been embraced as "wholesome".)
However, as with anything we put into our minds via our senses, what we spend our time with affects us to a much higher degree than most of us will admit, especially when that material implies that it presents an accurate view of God and/or Godliness. Therefore, I find the following warnings appropriate:
1) Make sure it's pure, edifying, and glorifies God. Paul's "advice" that "to the pure all things are pure" did NOT mean that we can expect to put any old trash into our minds (no matter what it's called!) and expect to somehow "purify" it. Read that verse (Titus 1:15) carefully in its context, and you'll find that it's surrounded by Paul's admonitions for righteous and holy living. He was actually saying that those who are pure show it by choosing to do things which are pure! (This is another of those verses that so often gets pulled out of context and twisted.) I'm sorry, but I'm afraid Christian "horror" books fall under condemnation if you believe me on this one, unless you can somehow honestly defend reading about men or women being terrified or threatened by other men or women (who are not carrying out Godly justice).
2) Because it really happens does not make it worth reading about. We are to be building ourselves up in Godliness, in order to be useful in instructing others. If you desire to know what true "reality" is like, then read God's Word, which includes His perspectives on the wrongful actions of His children (starting with Adam, through Abram, Moses, Job and his friends, David, etc.) and those who are not His (including Cain, those destroyed by the flood, Aaron's sons, Eli's sons, King Saul, etc.). This does not mean that we are never to read about the troubles of this world, non-believers, or our brothers and sisters in Christ (I heartily recommend Voice of the Martyrs) -- but always in building wisdom and concern, never as "entertainment".
3) Steer clear of anyone or anything, outside of God's Word, that attempts to speak FOR God. (This, of course, is not in the same category as conscientious writers of sound faith and doctrine, who meditate on and attempt to apply God's Word.) If a book has a character or characters representing God (or even worse, identified AS God), it breaks the second of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:4, since the command prohibits making any images of anything in heaven above, including God). Once that characterization (the author's idea of God) speaks a word or takes an action which is not a direct quote from scripture, or uses scripture out of context, then the author has crossed the line into blasphemy. The more I seek to know God on His terms, in the light of His Word, and fall in love with Him, the more vile I find those works of fiction which would be so fool-hardy as to attempt to put men's words into the mouth of God.
4) Know yourself and your motivations. Ironically, we can only begin to truly know ourselves as we draw closer and closer to the One True God, and see ourselves in the light of His Word and His Spirit. This means spending time in His Word, meditating (properly, in His presence and under His guidance) on His Word and applying them properly to our lives. I will not fail to admit that there are those Christians called out by God to be watchers and discerners for Believers (and perhaps non-believers), nor can I dismiss the value of fiction as a resource, especially for those who are young in age and/or in truth, and possibly even in reaching out in some ways to those who are lost (though I must note that it is not specifically listed in the Bible, as is preaching and reading God's Word). However, Christian growth (sanctification) is a process we begin and continue to experience by grace through faith, and as we grow we are to constantly check our forward progress and our ability to "chew" more and more of the "meat" of God's Word.
I pray that God would bless our churches with Christians who truly hunger and thirst after His Word, and so reflect His truth to the people He has given them to influence.
Body... Outdoors
Spring may finally be here! I'm looking forward to a weekend of warmer temperatures in the Midwest (though chances are good it will rain -- again), enjoying the lengthening days, and perhaps even some sun-shine.
One of the greatest "common" blessings that I know of in this life is the chance to be outdoors, enjoying God's creation. But how many of us stop to think about what is really out there, and how much good it can do us if we're fairly wise about it?
I've enjoyed riding my bicycle year-round the last couple of years. Before that, I was strictly a fair-weather outsider -- when the temperature fell below 40 degrees in the morning, or water began to fall from the sky (or even stand in the street), I headed for the gym instead. I've found I have to be careful what I proclaim (words are too easily eaten, and while calorie-free usually taste terrible), but I'm pretty much done with that, at least for now. I used to be miserable all winter, huddling in heavy coats or layers of clothes while my nose ran and I went through one round of illness after another (sinus infections, colds, flu, stomach viruses -- you name it). Now, I feel much better, I rarely get sick, and my tolerance for cold air (and dampness) is much higher (OK, my nose still runs more than it probably should, but I can live with that).
Admittedly, spending more time outdoors, riding and running no matter what the weather brought, was not my only change -- I've learned more about using vitamins and minerals and "toxic cleansing" to head off sicknesses early, I've learned more about which foods to eat (and which ones not to eat), and I do a little better about getting more sleep when I need it. But I'm convinced that hiding-out in the gym for the winter exposed me to more germs, and did very little to build up my immune-system.
The more I learn about what works well for my body, the more I'm convinced that God designed into us more adaptability than we realize (especially true for those who fail to realize that there even is one true God!). So go enjoy the double blessing of the outdoors -- enjoying creation while benefiting from it!
One of the greatest "common" blessings that I know of in this life is the chance to be outdoors, enjoying God's creation. But how many of us stop to think about what is really out there, and how much good it can do us if we're fairly wise about it?
I've enjoyed riding my bicycle year-round the last couple of years. Before that, I was strictly a fair-weather outsider -- when the temperature fell below 40 degrees in the morning, or water began to fall from the sky (or even stand in the street), I headed for the gym instead. I've found I have to be careful what I proclaim (words are too easily eaten, and while calorie-free usually taste terrible), but I'm pretty much done with that, at least for now. I used to be miserable all winter, huddling in heavy coats or layers of clothes while my nose ran and I went through one round of illness after another (sinus infections, colds, flu, stomach viruses -- you name it). Now, I feel much better, I rarely get sick, and my tolerance for cold air (and dampness) is much higher (OK, my nose still runs more than it probably should, but I can live with that).
Admittedly, spending more time outdoors, riding and running no matter what the weather brought, was not my only change -- I've learned more about using vitamins and minerals and "toxic cleansing" to head off sicknesses early, I've learned more about which foods to eat (and which ones not to eat), and I do a little better about getting more sleep when I need it. But I'm convinced that hiding-out in the gym for the winter exposed me to more germs, and did very little to build up my immune-system.
The more I learn about what works well for my body, the more I'm convinced that God designed into us more adaptability than we realize (especially true for those who fail to realize that there even is one true God!). So go enjoy the double blessing of the outdoors -- enjoying creation while benefiting from it!
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Heart and Soul... What Wondrous Love is This!
John ("the disciple whom Jesus loved", in his own words) twice writes "God is love" in the first of his three letters in the New Testament (1 John 4:8 and 1 John 4:16). What a glorious and magnificent statement! And yet, it is now so often mis-used and almost universally mis-understood as to have become commonplace and seemingly impotent.
Please do not conclude that I think ANY of God's Word can truly and finally become impotent -- it is, after all, divinely inspired and therefore divinely protected. God's Word is not just a book "of historical significance" or words on a page -- it is living and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword. And yet, for God's own purposes, according to His sovereign will, He allows Satan (the prince of this world) and those of this world to twist and bend and pervert even Scripture to suit themselves (Matt. 4:6, Luke 4:10, etc.). Complacency and lack of wise discernment with regards to God's Word are just as effective in keeping even true Christians from being useful to God as are outright sinfulness and pride -- for who can share a Gospel they don't know, or make disciples for a Master whose commands and statutes they don't take the time, or make the effort, to learn?
Contemporary Christians usually, if not always, take John's words to mean that God can be understood, at least in some ways, in the "light" of a human understanding of "love". Yet between the two statements, John points first not to any love that we have "inherently", but to love that has been revealed in us and given to us (as Christians), "not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation concerning our sins" (1 Jn. 4:10). ("Propitiation" -- what a great, strong word! I am grateful that limited use has made it mostly uncompromised!) John therefore does NOT in any way seek to define God by our limited understanding of "love" (nor does any other part of God's Word!), but, conversely, defines love in terms of God's active grace on the behalf of His elect (I would say His "children", but that term, too, is mis-used and mis-understood). It is only in the light of this grace that we can ever truly understand true love -- the sort of love that creates life (Genesis 1 and 2), judges it (Genesis 3 and 18:20-33), destroys it (Genesis 6 and 19), preserves it (Genesis 6 - 9, 45-50, Exodus 3 - 14), draws it to itself (Genesis 11 - 17, 28, Exodus 19), teaches it (Exodus 20-31), burns with righteous anger against it (Exodus 32:1-10), has mercy upon it (Exodus 32:11-14), and allows his servant to carry out His judgment upon it (Exodus 32:19-28). (All this in the first two chapters of God's Word, even before specific mention is given of the greatest act of love of all, in Christ's propitiation and atonement!)
How could we possibly convey such a tremendous and glorious love by telling people that "God loves you" (a statement which deserves the mockery that it evokes, when put forth to comman man without any background of Scripturally true love), or do it any justice with puny human contrivances such as "the Roman's Road" or the "ABCs of Salvation"?!?
What wondrous love is this, O my soul, O my soul!
What wondrous love is this, O my soul!
What wondrous love is this that caused the Lord of bliss
To bear the dreadful curse for my soul, for my soul,
To bear the dreadful curse for my soul.
When I was sinking down, sinking down, sinking down,
When I was sinking down, sinking down,
When I was sinking down beneath God’s righteous frown,
Christ laid aside His crown for my soul, for my soul,
Christ laid aside His crown for my soul.
To God and to the Lamb, I will sing, I will sing;
To God and to the Lamb, I will sing.
To God and to the Lamb Who is the great “I Am”;
While millions join the theme, I will sing, I will sing;
While millions join the theme, I will sing.
And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing on, I’ll sing on;
And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing on.
And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing and joyful be;
And through eternity, I’ll sing on, I’ll sing on;
And through eternity, I’ll sing on.
Words: Attributed to Alexander Means.
Music: From The Southern Harmony and Musical Companion, by William Walker (New York: Hastings House, 1835); arranged by William J. Reynolds (1920-).
Thanks to www.cyberhymnal.org (http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/w/h/a/whatwond.htm).
Please do not conclude that I think ANY of God's Word can truly and finally become impotent -- it is, after all, divinely inspired and therefore divinely protected. God's Word is not just a book "of historical significance" or words on a page -- it is living and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword. And yet, for God's own purposes, according to His sovereign will, He allows Satan (the prince of this world) and those of this world to twist and bend and pervert even Scripture to suit themselves (Matt. 4:6, Luke 4:10, etc.). Complacency and lack of wise discernment with regards to God's Word are just as effective in keeping even true Christians from being useful to God as are outright sinfulness and pride -- for who can share a Gospel they don't know, or make disciples for a Master whose commands and statutes they don't take the time, or make the effort, to learn?
Contemporary Christians usually, if not always, take John's words to mean that God can be understood, at least in some ways, in the "light" of a human understanding of "love". Yet between the two statements, John points first not to any love that we have "inherently", but to love that has been revealed in us and given to us (as Christians), "not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation concerning our sins" (1 Jn. 4:10). ("Propitiation" -- what a great, strong word! I am grateful that limited use has made it mostly uncompromised!) John therefore does NOT in any way seek to define God by our limited understanding of "love" (nor does any other part of God's Word!), but, conversely, defines love in terms of God's active grace on the behalf of His elect (I would say His "children", but that term, too, is mis-used and mis-understood). It is only in the light of this grace that we can ever truly understand true love -- the sort of love that creates life (Genesis 1 and 2), judges it (Genesis 3 and 18:20-33), destroys it (Genesis 6 and 19), preserves it (Genesis 6 - 9, 45-50, Exodus 3 - 14), draws it to itself (Genesis 11 - 17, 28, Exodus 19), teaches it (Exodus 20-31), burns with righteous anger against it (Exodus 32:1-10), has mercy upon it (Exodus 32:11-14), and allows his servant to carry out His judgment upon it (Exodus 32:19-28). (All this in the first two chapters of God's Word, even before specific mention is given of the greatest act of love of all, in Christ's propitiation and atonement!)
How could we possibly convey such a tremendous and glorious love by telling people that "God loves you" (a statement which deserves the mockery that it evokes, when put forth to comman man without any background of Scripturally true love), or do it any justice with puny human contrivances such as "the Roman's Road" or the "ABCs of Salvation"?!?
What wondrous love is this, O my soul, O my soul!
What wondrous love is this, O my soul!
What wondrous love is this that caused the Lord of bliss
To bear the dreadful curse for my soul, for my soul,
To bear the dreadful curse for my soul.
When I was sinking down, sinking down, sinking down,
When I was sinking down, sinking down,
When I was sinking down beneath God’s righteous frown,
Christ laid aside His crown for my soul, for my soul,
Christ laid aside His crown for my soul.
To God and to the Lamb, I will sing, I will sing;
To God and to the Lamb, I will sing.
To God and to the Lamb Who is the great “I Am”;
While millions join the theme, I will sing, I will sing;
While millions join the theme, I will sing.
And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing on, I’ll sing on;
And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing on.
And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing and joyful be;
And through eternity, I’ll sing on, I’ll sing on;
And through eternity, I’ll sing on.
Words: Attributed to Alexander Means.
Music: From The Southern Harmony and Musical Companion, by William Walker (New York: Hastings House, 1835); arranged by William J. Reynolds (1920-).
Thanks to www.cyberhymnal.org (http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/w/h/a/whatwond.htm).
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Soul and Heart... No Greater Love Than This
As I reflected upon Easter tonight, and prepared for the celebration of Christ's resurrection (and our Life because of it!) tomorrow, and tried to help prepare my children's hearts, I was once more struck by the majesty and truth and glory of His LOVE. At the same time, I am deeply saddened by our unintentional and yet very real trivialization of God's love, as we Christians try to "share" God's "love" with a "lost and dying world" (a phrase which is true in one sense and yet unBiblically hopeless in another). In trying to "share" God, we think our "job" as Christians is to tell the world (which is by definition unregenerate and unrepentant, for once someone is seized by God they are no longer of the world) that God "loves" them.
As a preparation for a future post, and for my own edification, I spent quite a bit of time tonight researching some contemporary Christian works of fiction, including "The Shack". I read a lot of good points on several web-sites, including http://hereiblog.com/2008/08/08/the-shack-review/ and http://www.challies.com/archives/book-reviews/the-shack-by-william-p-young.php , but as I read down through the back-and-forth discussion on the first site I couldn't help but notice that many of us Christians (yes, even those of us who identify ourselves as "Reformed") seem to see "truth" and "love" as being in some sort of tension, as though we have to constantly balance upon a tightrope in order to follow Paul's admonition in Ephesians 4:15 that we are to be "speaking the truth in love".
Of course, there is a Biblical basis for differentiating (or at least separately listing) "truth" and "love", as in the above verse and in 2 John 1:3, but as we recognize the majesty and inerrancy of God's Word we should come to terms with the fact that just because two ideas seem contradictory to our limited human minds (the best other example I can think of is God's sovereignty over everything versus man's responsibility for his own sin) does not mean that they are not both equally, Biblically true.
As usual, one of my friends and mentors has already said it first, and best (though for lack of photographic memory I must paraphrase here): there is only one truth, and love is contained within it. Not only is truth cold and hard without true love, but it actually ceases to be actual truth (one could substitute the word "orthodoxy" here, which embodies most, if not all, of true doctrine). And not only is love washed out and useless without truth, but it is NOT actually true love!
"No greater love has man than this, that He lay down His life for his friends." (John 15:13) Thank you, Lord! May we all do a better job of proclaiming the true significance of Your love!
As a preparation for a future post, and for my own edification, I spent quite a bit of time tonight researching some contemporary Christian works of fiction, including "The Shack". I read a lot of good points on several web-sites, including http://hereiblog.com/2008/08/08/the-shack-review/ and http://www.challies.com/archives/book-reviews/the-shack-by-william-p-young.php , but as I read down through the back-and-forth discussion on the first site I couldn't help but notice that many of us Christians (yes, even those of us who identify ourselves as "Reformed") seem to see "truth" and "love" as being in some sort of tension, as though we have to constantly balance upon a tightrope in order to follow Paul's admonition in Ephesians 4:15 that we are to be "speaking the truth in love".
Of course, there is a Biblical basis for differentiating (or at least separately listing) "truth" and "love", as in the above verse and in 2 John 1:3, but as we recognize the majesty and inerrancy of God's Word we should come to terms with the fact that just because two ideas seem contradictory to our limited human minds (the best other example I can think of is God's sovereignty over everything versus man's responsibility for his own sin) does not mean that they are not both equally, Biblically true.
As usual, one of my friends and mentors has already said it first, and best (though for lack of photographic memory I must paraphrase here): there is only one truth, and love is contained within it. Not only is truth cold and hard without true love, but it actually ceases to be actual truth (one could substitute the word "orthodoxy" here, which embodies most, if not all, of true doctrine). And not only is love washed out and useless without truth, but it is NOT actually true love!
"No greater love has man than this, that He lay down His life for his friends." (John 15:13) Thank you, Lord! May we all do a better job of proclaiming the true significance of Your love!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
