So I guess I have to write something, but even as I'm typing here, I'm not sure what. Every day since Monday when Phil died, I have thought about writing but haven't been able to. What do I write? What do I say? How do I put into words all that I am thinking, feeling, needing? Where do I begin? Peralisis takes captive my ability to communicate. And few words have made their way past my lips over the course of this week. And for those who may be reading this, but have no idea what I'm talking about, I refer you to Phil and Esther's blog eslip.blogspot.com to read about Phil and Esther's ministry and events leading up to his recent death.
Tonight was Phil's American funeral here in Chicago. There were tons of people there who I haven't seen in forever, including a handful of individuals I went to college with and are now serving in God's kingdom across the globe. It was good seeing them again.
I guess the biggest thing I'm wrestling with in all of this is in God's reasoning for letting Phil die. Phil, as a result of this world's brokenness, contracted a rapidly spreading bacterial infection. Righteous women and men throughout the earth prayed for his healing. And God chose to say no to their prayers and let him die. Why? God's Word says that such prayers are "powerful and effective" (James 5:16). Where was their effect on Monday?
On top of the frustration of unanswered prayers is Phil's unique situation. It has seemed that his entire life and especially recent years have lead directly to his ministry in Southeast Asia. Years of preperation went into his future work there. He and Esther and Anna arrived and barely got started. He finished language school and so soon after went to get certified to teach English, and the weekend he finishes his certification, he dies. For what? It all just seems so futile. So pointless. Was less than two years going through training more valuable than potential decades of ministry here in the States? Was that brief time worth Anna growing up without her Daddy? And Esther without the love of her life? And because I do believe God is in control over all of this, I come back to the purpose of it all... But I can't find one. I just don't understand.
And yet I do believe that such a purpose must exist. God is intentional. And he is in the midst of carrying out a great and global plan. I do believe that Phil's untimely and illogical death somehow (in large or in small) fits into that plan. It's my own feeble inability to make personal sense of it that is so excrusiating.
But I think tonight maybe I saw some of this purpose. At the funeral there was much talk of how Phil's life has motivated, impacted, spurred on the lives of others. Countless more than I ever realized. I knew Phil was loved, but what I found tonight goes far beyond what I ever imagined. Someone tonight (I forget who) quoted an Asian saying that for every soldier that goes down, a thousand more rise up. Normally I would relegate this as optimism at its best in the midst of a grieving community. But at tonight's gathering, I really saw light of this reality. I saw people being challenged by Phil's incredible commitment. I found people who were challenged to live more like Phil as he lived like the Lord Jesus.
I must admit in my weak human state that I really don't know how God will use this past week to impact his worldwide work. I pray that he will use it in astronomical ways that could not have been done apart from his passing. I pray that my life may be challenged in new ways as a result of it. And from all the processing it has forced me to do, I think this impact is evident. I do believe God is at work, and I believe there is real hope in the brokenness of this thing we call life. I believe that Phil stands as an example of what great things God can accomplish in this world. Even if those great things take paths unexpected along the way.
Phil will always be missed. But if there is one thing we can learn from his life, it is the reality of God's faithfulness. Even when we don't understand it.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
In an Absence of Comic Relief
I remember watching this movie as a child, but I don't recall the name. I think it was one of those made-for-tv movies. In it was a somewhat classic image of the power-wielding, abusive husband. He was also religious. Christian. I think maybe a pastor. The story's focus was on this abusive family situation. A major component was this husband's spouting of Scripture verses and biblical themes. His beatings were peppered with calls to obedience and commands of submission. As expected (justly), this pastor husband was painted as beastly and even delusional. There was no humanizing of this monster. Not a moment of comic relief.
Without surprise, the tormented wife was not religious. And in some respects, if my recall of childhood movie watching serves me faithful, religion was positioned as responsible for the abuse. Clearly this man was misrepresenting the long cherished words of Scripture. He was perverting the words toward his own gain. Yet the movie welled up in me the feeling that the Bible's possession of pervertable commands demanded its partial responsibility. Verses with such dark clouds over them deserve some of the blame. Regardless of context, the verses still said what they said.
I have thought on this movie and similar stories throughout the years since. As a student of the Bible, what it has to say about the relationships between women and men have given me more than my fair share of trouble. And for some of these passages, I still wrestle with how exactly it all works out.
But for one of these passages, indeed the one that speaks the most to the marriage relationship, it would do us all some good to set our assumptions aside and actually look at what the text says. In his letter to the Ephesians, the apostle Paul takes a significant portion of space to explain what it looks like as the Spirit of God fills believers with "submitting to one another out of reverence to Christ" (5:21, ESV). He shows readers what this looks like in three types of relationships (commonly known as a "house code"), and the first of these is marital. So we're all on the same page, I have the entire text here:
Now I could go on for quite a while in several different directions on the beauty and nuances of the apostle's words here. But what I simply want to demonstrate at this point is how our assumptions mislead us to misapply what is actually being said.
Certain key words and phrases often catch our eye. "Wives, submit." "The husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church." "Wives should submit in everything to their husbands." Let me here begin by pointing out that all of these commands are directed toward the wife-half of the teaching. In other words, the teaching is split in half, with the first directed toward what wives are supposed to do and second toward what husbands are supposed to do. All (as in every single occurrence) of the times Paul talks about wives submitting are in the wife-half of the teaching.
Now, it's true that the women are given a difficult task here, especially if we are careful to not inappropriately water down the words Paul uses. However, I keep in mind that according to 5:21, we are all to submit to one another in the community of faith. I also kind of feel that if God is calling wives to some particular focus in a relationship, that may be more between him and them, as opposed to my responsibility to monitor their following.
I think as husbands (for myself and any others) the need is much more pressing that we make sure we are fulfilling our half of Paul's teaching. But this is where I have seen far too many (maybe even all) expositions on this passage get terribly side-tracked. When we talk about the husband's "role" in marriage, we look at what the wife-half says about husbands rather than what the husband-half says about husbands.
Did you catch that? It seems most rational to me that if we want to see what husbands are supposed to do, we should concentrate on what it says husbands should do. The problem is that traditionally we look more at what the wives' calling says about husbands.
I am issuing a call that we look to what 5:25-33 says husbands should do. It is almost as if men need not even look to verses 22-24, since it is between God and the women anyway.
So what does it say men are to do? How are men to live our their biblical role as husbands? Lord over their wives? Ensure their "headship?" Call wives to submission? Demand obedience? No. No. No. No on every count. Men are never told to demand anything of their wives. They are never told to make sure they do anything. The husband-role is NOT to make sure their wives fulfill theirs. And they are certainly not called to be any sort of lord or master or boss or ruler.
"But they are called to be as Christ over the church," the objection cries out! See, this is where our self-made, culture-forming assumptions haze over the truth of Paul's words. It is true, the husband's role as "head" of his wife is explained as Christ's role as head of the church. However (this is where you lean forward and listen closely), Paul does not say, "Husbands, lead your wives, as Christ leads the church and reigns sovereignly over her on his throne." No this is not throneship imagery. As truly as Christ does reign in that way, it is not the imagery Paul uses to explain the husband's role.
Instead (you're still leaning forward) Paul uses imagery of complete self-sacrifice. Of the highest and truest form of self-denial. He writes, "Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her," i.e. on the cross. That's it. The rest of the verses explain this kind of sacrifice and how a man's self-denial serves as a picture of Jesus' love for humanity. The marriage relationship is designed to be a picture of the Gospel. Nothing about ruling or lording. No imagery of domination. No one saying, "I'm the king of this castle," or "It's my way or the highway." It would do us all good to repeat: Men are NEVER told to make sure their wives do anything!
When Jesus was on his way to the cross, he did not assert his authority. He did not straighten his pose and pronounce his headship. When they attacked him (verbally and physically) he did not retaliate. He stood silent. Silent. When they stole his dignity, he said nothing of roles and responsibilities. When they marched him to his own death, he went. He let them kill him. And this death spoke of his love more than any other act in all of history. This is Gospel.
And this is the imagery the apostle uses to describe how men are to relate to their wives. This is the husband's role. We have much to learn. Much indeed. What would it look like if husbands did not retaliate when attacked? What if they did not feel the need to reassert their headship when he felt their dignity torn away? What if, when husbands felt attacked (verbally or even physically) they simply stood silent? What would that look like? What if husbands, in an attempt to form biblically sound marriages, sacrificed their authority, power, respect, and even their decision-making "rights"? This is to say nothing of truly selfish desires, preferences, and comforts. What if all of these treasured and masculine attributes were laid on the alter of love? I'm not sure I've ever seen such a marriage, but I think it may communicate the love and sacrifice of Jesus Christ in the most powerful way. I think it may bring a message that speaks the Gospel.
So this is my calling. As husbands this is what we are called to embrace. It surely involves much more watching over ourselves than watching over our wives. And maybe, just maybe, wives would find it easier to fulfill whatever marital obligations Paul brings them, if they know and trust and feel that we are fulfilling ours. So I issue an invitation to all men, but especially those who profess a love for Jesus, to follow him in the most fundamental and critical way. To love our wives till it hurts. To love them like Jesus loves us. I issue a call to put our assumptions away and live as Paul has called us. To forget the throne. And to pick up a cross.
Without surprise, the tormented wife was not religious. And in some respects, if my recall of childhood movie watching serves me faithful, religion was positioned as responsible for the abuse. Clearly this man was misrepresenting the long cherished words of Scripture. He was perverting the words toward his own gain. Yet the movie welled up in me the feeling that the Bible's possession of pervertable commands demanded its partial responsibility. Verses with such dark clouds over them deserve some of the blame. Regardless of context, the verses still said what they said.
I have thought on this movie and similar stories throughout the years since. As a student of the Bible, what it has to say about the relationships between women and men have given me more than my fair share of trouble. And for some of these passages, I still wrestle with how exactly it all works out.
But for one of these passages, indeed the one that speaks the most to the marriage relationship, it would do us all some good to set our assumptions aside and actually look at what the text says. In his letter to the Ephesians, the apostle Paul takes a significant portion of space to explain what it looks like as the Spirit of God fills believers with "submitting to one another out of reverence to Christ" (5:21, ESV). He shows readers what this looks like in three types of relationships (commonly known as a "house code"), and the first of these is marital. So we're all on the same page, I have the entire text here:
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.
Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. (Ephesians 5:22-33)
Now I could go on for quite a while in several different directions on the beauty and nuances of the apostle's words here. But what I simply want to demonstrate at this point is how our assumptions mislead us to misapply what is actually being said.
Certain key words and phrases often catch our eye. "Wives, submit." "The husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church." "Wives should submit in everything to their husbands." Let me here begin by pointing out that all of these commands are directed toward the wife-half of the teaching. In other words, the teaching is split in half, with the first directed toward what wives are supposed to do and second toward what husbands are supposed to do. All (as in every single occurrence) of the times Paul talks about wives submitting are in the wife-half of the teaching.
Now, it's true that the women are given a difficult task here, especially if we are careful to not inappropriately water down the words Paul uses. However, I keep in mind that according to 5:21, we are all to submit to one another in the community of faith. I also kind of feel that if God is calling wives to some particular focus in a relationship, that may be more between him and them, as opposed to my responsibility to monitor their following.
I think as husbands (for myself and any others) the need is much more pressing that we make sure we are fulfilling our half of Paul's teaching. But this is where I have seen far too many (maybe even all) expositions on this passage get terribly side-tracked. When we talk about the husband's "role" in marriage, we look at what the wife-half says about husbands rather than what the husband-half says about husbands.
Did you catch that? It seems most rational to me that if we want to see what husbands are supposed to do, we should concentrate on what it says husbands should do. The problem is that traditionally we look more at what the wives' calling says about husbands.
I am issuing a call that we look to what 5:25-33 says husbands should do. It is almost as if men need not even look to verses 22-24, since it is between God and the women anyway.
So what does it say men are to do? How are men to live our their biblical role as husbands? Lord over their wives? Ensure their "headship?" Call wives to submission? Demand obedience? No. No. No. No on every count. Men are never told to demand anything of their wives. They are never told to make sure they do anything. The husband-role is NOT to make sure their wives fulfill theirs. And they are certainly not called to be any sort of lord or master or boss or ruler.
"But they are called to be as Christ over the church," the objection cries out! See, this is where our self-made, culture-forming assumptions haze over the truth of Paul's words. It is true, the husband's role as "head" of his wife is explained as Christ's role as head of the church. However (this is where you lean forward and listen closely), Paul does not say, "Husbands, lead your wives, as Christ leads the church and reigns sovereignly over her on his throne." No this is not throneship imagery. As truly as Christ does reign in that way, it is not the imagery Paul uses to explain the husband's role.
Instead (you're still leaning forward) Paul uses imagery of complete self-sacrifice. Of the highest and truest form of self-denial. He writes, "Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her," i.e. on the cross. That's it. The rest of the verses explain this kind of sacrifice and how a man's self-denial serves as a picture of Jesus' love for humanity. The marriage relationship is designed to be a picture of the Gospel. Nothing about ruling or lording. No imagery of domination. No one saying, "I'm the king of this castle," or "It's my way or the highway." It would do us all good to repeat: Men are NEVER told to make sure their wives do anything!
When Jesus was on his way to the cross, he did not assert his authority. He did not straighten his pose and pronounce his headship. When they attacked him (verbally and physically) he did not retaliate. He stood silent. Silent. When they stole his dignity, he said nothing of roles and responsibilities. When they marched him to his own death, he went. He let them kill him. And this death spoke of his love more than any other act in all of history. This is Gospel.
And this is the imagery the apostle uses to describe how men are to relate to their wives. This is the husband's role. We have much to learn. Much indeed. What would it look like if husbands did not retaliate when attacked? What if they did not feel the need to reassert their headship when he felt their dignity torn away? What if, when husbands felt attacked (verbally or even physically) they simply stood silent? What would that look like? What if husbands, in an attempt to form biblically sound marriages, sacrificed their authority, power, respect, and even their decision-making "rights"? This is to say nothing of truly selfish desires, preferences, and comforts. What if all of these treasured and masculine attributes were laid on the alter of love? I'm not sure I've ever seen such a marriage, but I think it may communicate the love and sacrifice of Jesus Christ in the most powerful way. I think it may bring a message that speaks the Gospel.
So this is my calling. As husbands this is what we are called to embrace. It surely involves much more watching over ourselves than watching over our wives. And maybe, just maybe, wives would find it easier to fulfill whatever marital obligations Paul brings them, if they know and trust and feel that we are fulfilling ours. So I issue an invitation to all men, but especially those who profess a love for Jesus, to follow him in the most fundamental and critical way. To love our wives till it hurts. To love them like Jesus loves us. I issue a call to put our assumptions away and live as Paul has called us. To forget the throne. And to pick up a cross.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
A Whirlwind Weekend, part three
More than Friday's meeting, more than Sunday's message, I have been dreading Monday morning's surgery for weeks. It's rather pathetic, I suppose. It's not like I had heart surgery or anything. It was really quite minimal. It was oral surgery. Yet, even the term "oral surgery" possibly makes it sound bigger than it is.
I had my four wisdom teeth extracted. It sounds like such a small thing. They're only teeth. As a child, your teeth just fall out. Others may be pulled for various reasons, but nonetheless... No one sweats over these.
Except me. I have never had a single surgery in my entire life. I've never had anesthesia or an IV shoved into my arm. These are all firsts. And I've been terrified over many a horror story about dry sockets, the condition that occurs by any number of actions that keep the blood clotting to take after the surgery. Dry sockets, I have heard, make you very ill for a up to a couple weeks. All this in addition to the typical dietary restrictions that follow the procedure.
I suppose it is the inconvenience of it all that has peaked the most anxiety in me. Though they say it takes a good four days to recover from the surgery (the second and third are supposed to be the worst in pain, stiffness, and swelling) and begin eating somewhat normally, I am planning on returning to work on Wednesday evening. I want and need to get back to work. On top of that, I have a ton of classwork that has been accumulating. If I got dry sockets and became ill for a couple weeks, this would be an even greater setback.
But now that I've covered all my fears leading up to the surgery, I can celebrate that it actually went very well. Though I could still lose my clotting and get dry sockets, the surgery itself was a breeze. Dr. Zak gestured to the bag of IV solution and said, "This is not the anaesthetic. It will only make you smile and feel good, but that's it for now." He walked away, and BOOM! I was out. The next thing I new, I was sitting on a couch in another room as my wife and daughters joined around me and I was apparently attempting to sign something to my wife.
Piece of cake. No nausea. My mouth didn't even hurt. By that afternoon, I really felt pretty good. And now on day two, I am amazed that this has gone as well as it has. I don't feel sick, yet I am forced to sit, reading and watching movies. These are pretty cool days.
I wonder why I am so prone to fear and worry. I mean, it's not like I am consumed with such things. But all of us: We get so needlessly worked up over things that are really pretty small. I wonder how my fear--be it of preaching on Sunday or of surgery on Monday--reflects my view of God. My perception of his power and his goodness. The problem with me isn't so much how I see his power. I believe he is all-mighty and sovereign and can accomplish anything he wills. My problem isn't even his goodness. I believe he is. At least generally speaking. I guess where I wrestle is in how his goodness manifests itself in my own life. How much his goodness is personal. How much it's for me.
So days like these are really good for my understanding of God's blessings. This weekend has had some pretty incredible and challenging events. And my nerves have peaked in a couple different ways. And yet on the other side of each of them, I have found myself quite thankful. I have found myself standing before a God who is full of both lively adventure and blessed calm.
At least until I get dry sockets.
I had my four wisdom teeth extracted. It sounds like such a small thing. They're only teeth. As a child, your teeth just fall out. Others may be pulled for various reasons, but nonetheless... No one sweats over these.
Except me. I have never had a single surgery in my entire life. I've never had anesthesia or an IV shoved into my arm. These are all firsts. And I've been terrified over many a horror story about dry sockets, the condition that occurs by any number of actions that keep the blood clotting to take after the surgery. Dry sockets, I have heard, make you very ill for a up to a couple weeks. All this in addition to the typical dietary restrictions that follow the procedure.
I suppose it is the inconvenience of it all that has peaked the most anxiety in me. Though they say it takes a good four days to recover from the surgery (the second and third are supposed to be the worst in pain, stiffness, and swelling) and begin eating somewhat normally, I am planning on returning to work on Wednesday evening. I want and need to get back to work. On top of that, I have a ton of classwork that has been accumulating. If I got dry sockets and became ill for a couple weeks, this would be an even greater setback.
But now that I've covered all my fears leading up to the surgery, I can celebrate that it actually went very well. Though I could still lose my clotting and get dry sockets, the surgery itself was a breeze. Dr. Zak gestured to the bag of IV solution and said, "This is not the anaesthetic. It will only make you smile and feel good, but that's it for now." He walked away, and BOOM! I was out. The next thing I new, I was sitting on a couch in another room as my wife and daughters joined around me and I was apparently attempting to sign something to my wife.
Piece of cake. No nausea. My mouth didn't even hurt. By that afternoon, I really felt pretty good. And now on day two, I am amazed that this has gone as well as it has. I don't feel sick, yet I am forced to sit, reading and watching movies. These are pretty cool days.
I wonder why I am so prone to fear and worry. I mean, it's not like I am consumed with such things. But all of us: We get so needlessly worked up over things that are really pretty small. I wonder how my fear--be it of preaching on Sunday or of surgery on Monday--reflects my view of God. My perception of his power and his goodness. The problem with me isn't so much how I see his power. I believe he is all-mighty and sovereign and can accomplish anything he wills. My problem isn't even his goodness. I believe he is. At least generally speaking. I guess where I wrestle is in how his goodness manifests itself in my own life. How much his goodness is personal. How much it's for me.
So days like these are really good for my understanding of God's blessings. This weekend has had some pretty incredible and challenging events. And my nerves have peaked in a couple different ways. And yet on the other side of each of them, I have found myself quite thankful. I have found myself standing before a God who is full of both lively adventure and blessed calm.
At least until I get dry sockets.
A Whirlwind Weekend, part two
Okay, I really have to watch myself here. I just don't have much time to write on this, but I know that I have to say something about it. Everyone keeps asking us how Sunday went, so here it is.
Sunday morning Justina and I went to West Hills Community Church in Westmont. I have been in contact with their elders and am being considered as a possible pastoral candidate. So this Sunday I was invited to come out and preach.
The morning before, everything was looking really good. I had my message prepared several days in advance and was just trying to wait on God and go into this thing prayed up with an open mind. However Saturday night as I was looking over my sermon, I realized something just didn't fit. Logically it wasn't working. This is in addition to the fact that I realized it was about 20 minutes longer than my given timeframe. This threw me all in a frenzy. And though it would seem easily fixed, I labored all evening and kept running into roadblocks.
Now you must understand, this is very difficult for me. I like everything ready and prepared. Especially for something really important, like when near-candidating for a church I would really like to pastor. This adds extra pressure to not mess this thing up by not being prepared. Though 24 hours earlier, I was calm, collected, and confident, I had become a bit of a wreck. I don't really get nervous about teaching and preaching, but here, all of a sudden, I was completely terrified. I had visions of blowing this thing. Of getting up there and this thing just exploding in my face. And, of course, of losing a chance at this opportunity to pastor that I would really like to have.
But then the unexpected: As I looked over my notes one last time in the parking lot, it all just snapped back together right in place. I entered the building and felt right at home. I joined the community in some really heart-felt worship (which is often times difficult for me). And as I walked up to the podium, I felt calm. As I spoke, it all just flowed out. And it seemed to flow well. As I prayed and rejoined the congregation, I just felt this overwhelming and divine presence surround me. I felt God's blessing. I felt his peace.
Now I don't' know if this means I will be the new pastor at West Hills. There is much more to the story than what is listed here. This is a church that has nearly run out of people. There are little resources, and the budget-to-income comparison may be in danger. But the people that are left are a great group of individuals dedicated to rolling up their sleeves and making this thing work. Before showing up I wasn't sure what to expect on a number of different levels ... because nearly all ministries have ceased due to lack of resources. I was expecting worship with 80s choruses to a single piano. And we left our girls with friends since I was unsure about children's programming. But to our surprise the worship was really good. Something almost as well put together at Bethel's Powerhouse band. And they did indeed have something for children, so next time (?) we will bring our girls. Anyway, I'm running into the potential of getting off track and making this more than you and I have time for.
I'm not sure what will happen with West Hills. As I said there are many issues to work though. Many questions on both their end and mine. They aren't even sure they are going to take on a new pastor. They may surrender everything to the denomination for a church restart or enter some sort of "merger" with a larger church. But if things keep progressing, you'll doubtlessly hear more. Though I'm sure from what I've told you so far, you are wondering what on earth I would want to take a spot like this. But I see almost innumerable opportunities in this community. And I'm not going to lie: the risk really excites me.
I'm getting off track again. I was supposed to end this thing.
So let me just say this. Sunday was brilliant. I wasn't sure what to expect, and I was more than a little freaked out as it neared. But as I sat in God's presence, he blessed. I guess I just want to testify as to how great it is to be in his hand. And I pray that I will continually learn to yield myself to his care. I look forward to the ride ahead. This journey of faith can be really terrifying and discouraging at times. But it is also really refreshing. I love his freshness.
And then I had oral surgery the next day. Stay tuned for part three.
Sunday morning Justina and I went to West Hills Community Church in Westmont. I have been in contact with their elders and am being considered as a possible pastoral candidate. So this Sunday I was invited to come out and preach.
The morning before, everything was looking really good. I had my message prepared several days in advance and was just trying to wait on God and go into this thing prayed up with an open mind. However Saturday night as I was looking over my sermon, I realized something just didn't fit. Logically it wasn't working. This is in addition to the fact that I realized it was about 20 minutes longer than my given timeframe. This threw me all in a frenzy. And though it would seem easily fixed, I labored all evening and kept running into roadblocks.
Now you must understand, this is very difficult for me. I like everything ready and prepared. Especially for something really important, like when near-candidating for a church I would really like to pastor. This adds extra pressure to not mess this thing up by not being prepared. Though 24 hours earlier, I was calm, collected, and confident, I had become a bit of a wreck. I don't really get nervous about teaching and preaching, but here, all of a sudden, I was completely terrified. I had visions of blowing this thing. Of getting up there and this thing just exploding in my face. And, of course, of losing a chance at this opportunity to pastor that I would really like to have.
But then the unexpected: As I looked over my notes one last time in the parking lot, it all just snapped back together right in place. I entered the building and felt right at home. I joined the community in some really heart-felt worship (which is often times difficult for me). And as I walked up to the podium, I felt calm. As I spoke, it all just flowed out. And it seemed to flow well. As I prayed and rejoined the congregation, I just felt this overwhelming and divine presence surround me. I felt God's blessing. I felt his peace.
Now I don't' know if this means I will be the new pastor at West Hills. There is much more to the story than what is listed here. This is a church that has nearly run out of people. There are little resources, and the budget-to-income comparison may be in danger. But the people that are left are a great group of individuals dedicated to rolling up their sleeves and making this thing work. Before showing up I wasn't sure what to expect on a number of different levels ... because nearly all ministries have ceased due to lack of resources. I was expecting worship with 80s choruses to a single piano. And we left our girls with friends since I was unsure about children's programming. But to our surprise the worship was really good. Something almost as well put together at Bethel's Powerhouse band. And they did indeed have something for children, so next time (?) we will bring our girls. Anyway, I'm running into the potential of getting off track and making this more than you and I have time for.
I'm not sure what will happen with West Hills. As I said there are many issues to work though. Many questions on both their end and mine. They aren't even sure they are going to take on a new pastor. They may surrender everything to the denomination for a church restart or enter some sort of "merger" with a larger church. But if things keep progressing, you'll doubtlessly hear more. Though I'm sure from what I've told you so far, you are wondering what on earth I would want to take a spot like this. But I see almost innumerable opportunities in this community. And I'm not going to lie: the risk really excites me.
I'm getting off track again. I was supposed to end this thing.
So let me just say this. Sunday was brilliant. I wasn't sure what to expect, and I was more than a little freaked out as it neared. But as I sat in God's presence, he blessed. I guess I just want to testify as to how great it is to be in his hand. And I pray that I will continually learn to yield myself to his care. I look forward to the ride ahead. This journey of faith can be really terrifying and discouraging at times. But it is also really refreshing. I love his freshness.
And then I had oral surgery the next day. Stay tuned for part three.
A Whirlwind Weekend, part one
Wow, what a week this has been! This week has been so eventful, I think I could easily check out the rest of the season and still call it an eventful one. Now for some these events are nothing of anxiety or excitement. But for me, call me a rookie, they most definitely were.
On Friday morning I met to discuss theology with two leaders of Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, otherwise known as Jehovah's Witnesses (Knock! Knock!). On Sunday morning I spoke at a church that I may soon pastor. And on yesterday, on Monday, I had my wisdom teeth extracted, which just happened to be the first surgery in all the history of Drew. Each of these three events appeared quite significant in my mind. And in an ideal world, I would blog on each of them.
Then again, in an ideal world, I would also love to write (1) on Pennsylvania's long awaited primary today (I'm the kind of guy that would love to write on politics, but it wouldn't contribute much), (2) on a couple mind-altering, philosophy-of-ministry-assaulting articles I read yesterday out of the new Leadership journal, and (3) on my virtually unbearable case of "senioritis" as I finish my MDiv. But this is not an ideal world, so I will not write on any of these latter items and only briefly on former.
Friday's meeting was actually part of a project for a class I'm taking. I had to choose a non-mainstream religious group to study and interview. It was to focus on theological points of soteriology, drawing comparisons between an Evangelical understanding and theirs. The primary point of the meeting was to serve as an opportunity to share the Gospel with leaders of the group. This is a different context than what most of us are used to. I'm not Ronald Paul Danatus. I am not much of an apologist or evangelist. But this was a good exercise. I met with an elder (basically their pastor) of the Kingdom Hall (like a local church) where two of my co-workers attend. And, though I wasn't expecting it, I should have: This elder invited his regional higher up to come and "lend assistance." So it was two on one. And while I just had my Bible, they had a library of books that they were constantly flipping back and forth through. Yet I think I held my own. And I challenged them on a few things, which they said they would research, that I am almost certain they will not.
My purpose here is not to give a detailed account of our time together. But what struck me most is their conviction that they know the truth. Their absolute resilience to their beliefs. I have no doubt that they are sincere in their presentations. I see no reason to believe that they are purposefully conniving or manipulative. They really believe this stuff. That this is from God. That it is what the Bible teaches.
And yet they are not allowed to consult any religious or biblical material that is not approved by Watchtower. So when I challenge them to look at some resources for their Bible study, I know they won't ... unless they are willing to "sin" by consulting works blazed in rebellion. They are not allowed to think on their own. And this is evident in the limitations placed on their reasoning.
I admit that sometimes the messiness of church structure turns me off. Part of me longs for one united Church where every congregation agrees on one set of doctrine. It would indeed make it seem more "straight from God." More undeniable and absolute. But after meeting with these two Jehovah's Witnesses, I realize that the cost of such stability is the surrender of free thinking. And Watchtower isn't the first "Christian" movement to seek such stability at all costs. Come to think of it, I think free thinking is more the exception than the norm.
The apostle Paul was definitely one who demanded unity in doctrine. Just one example is seen in the way he writes First Timothy: "Teach and urge these things. If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words ... he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing" (6:2-4). Indeed he even writes, "By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith, among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme" (1:19-20). Yet at the same time, even Peter acknowledges the difficulty of understanding some of the teaching in Paul's writings (2Pe 3:15-16). And on top of Peter's vulnerable observation, today we have almost 2000 years of cultural, historical, and grammatical fog to make things a little more difficult, not just with Paul but also with Peter, as well as the rest of the Bible. We may all agree that there is need for correct doctrine, it's just not always obvious what that correct way of understanding the Bible is.
Thus the need for free thinking. Thus the need for each individual leader and group and follower to be able to examine the evidence and the Scriptures for themselves. And for this reason, any movement that forbids its congregants of reading anything un-official is indeed a dangerous one. In so doing they make their "official" interpretive materials on par with the Bible itself. They pronounce their minds (any less flawed than the rest of ours?) inspired by God.
So three and a half hours after our meeting began, I walked away grieving a little. Saddened by the thought that these two men are not allowed to think outside the fence. And there they will remain unless the Spirit of God should motivate them to dare think outside of it.
Yet as I walked back to my van, I was also thankful. Thankful for our sometimes messy faith, which allows me to wrestle with it and therefore take all that much more assurance of it. Believe me, I have had my wrestling match with faith. Nearly two years of wrestling with the existence of God and the validity of the Bible. All while in seminary. I have had my battles, but it is within these battles and their aftermath that my faith has come out all that much more sure and strong. Will these two men ever know that confidence? I pray so.
In case you haven't yet guessed it, I rambled way too long and am forced to write about the rest of my whirlwind weekend later.
On Friday morning I met to discuss theology with two leaders of Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, otherwise known as Jehovah's Witnesses (Knock! Knock!). On Sunday morning I spoke at a church that I may soon pastor. And on yesterday, on Monday, I had my wisdom teeth extracted, which just happened to be the first surgery in all the history of Drew. Each of these three events appeared quite significant in my mind. And in an ideal world, I would blog on each of them.
Then again, in an ideal world, I would also love to write (1) on Pennsylvania's long awaited primary today (I'm the kind of guy that would love to write on politics, but it wouldn't contribute much), (2) on a couple mind-altering, philosophy-of-ministry-assaulting articles I read yesterday out of the new Leadership journal, and (3) on my virtually unbearable case of "senioritis" as I finish my MDiv. But this is not an ideal world, so I will not write on any of these latter items and only briefly on former.
Friday's meeting was actually part of a project for a class I'm taking. I had to choose a non-mainstream religious group to study and interview. It was to focus on theological points of soteriology, drawing comparisons between an Evangelical understanding and theirs. The primary point of the meeting was to serve as an opportunity to share the Gospel with leaders of the group. This is a different context than what most of us are used to. I'm not Ronald Paul Danatus. I am not much of an apologist or evangelist. But this was a good exercise. I met with an elder (basically their pastor) of the Kingdom Hall (like a local church) where two of my co-workers attend. And, though I wasn't expecting it, I should have: This elder invited his regional higher up to come and "lend assistance." So it was two on one. And while I just had my Bible, they had a library of books that they were constantly flipping back and forth through. Yet I think I held my own. And I challenged them on a few things, which they said they would research, that I am almost certain they will not.
My purpose here is not to give a detailed account of our time together. But what struck me most is their conviction that they know the truth. Their absolute resilience to their beliefs. I have no doubt that they are sincere in their presentations. I see no reason to believe that they are purposefully conniving or manipulative. They really believe this stuff. That this is from God. That it is what the Bible teaches.
And yet they are not allowed to consult any religious or biblical material that is not approved by Watchtower. So when I challenge them to look at some resources for their Bible study, I know they won't ... unless they are willing to "sin" by consulting works blazed in rebellion. They are not allowed to think on their own. And this is evident in the limitations placed on their reasoning.
I admit that sometimes the messiness of church structure turns me off. Part of me longs for one united Church where every congregation agrees on one set of doctrine. It would indeed make it seem more "straight from God." More undeniable and absolute. But after meeting with these two Jehovah's Witnesses, I realize that the cost of such stability is the surrender of free thinking. And Watchtower isn't the first "Christian" movement to seek such stability at all costs. Come to think of it, I think free thinking is more the exception than the norm.
The apostle Paul was definitely one who demanded unity in doctrine. Just one example is seen in the way he writes First Timothy: "Teach and urge these things. If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words ... he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing" (6:2-4). Indeed he even writes, "By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith, among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme" (1:19-20). Yet at the same time, even Peter acknowledges the difficulty of understanding some of the teaching in Paul's writings (2Pe 3:15-16). And on top of Peter's vulnerable observation, today we have almost 2000 years of cultural, historical, and grammatical fog to make things a little more difficult, not just with Paul but also with Peter, as well as the rest of the Bible. We may all agree that there is need for correct doctrine, it's just not always obvious what that correct way of understanding the Bible is.
Thus the need for free thinking. Thus the need for each individual leader and group and follower to be able to examine the evidence and the Scriptures for themselves. And for this reason, any movement that forbids its congregants of reading anything un-official is indeed a dangerous one. In so doing they make their "official" interpretive materials on par with the Bible itself. They pronounce their minds (any less flawed than the rest of ours?) inspired by God.
So three and a half hours after our meeting began, I walked away grieving a little. Saddened by the thought that these two men are not allowed to think outside the fence. And there they will remain unless the Spirit of God should motivate them to dare think outside of it.
Yet as I walked back to my van, I was also thankful. Thankful for our sometimes messy faith, which allows me to wrestle with it and therefore take all that much more assurance of it. Believe me, I have had my wrestling match with faith. Nearly two years of wrestling with the existence of God and the validity of the Bible. All while in seminary. I have had my battles, but it is within these battles and their aftermath that my faith has come out all that much more sure and strong. Will these two men ever know that confidence? I pray so.
In case you haven't yet guessed it, I rambled way too long and am forced to write about the rest of my whirlwind weekend later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
