Can We Talk?

Pet Peeve Number Three

I had a doctor’s appointment at the VA hospital in Portland Oregon yesterday. Fortunately I was able to drive the 40 some miles to the Vancouver (WA) Medical Center and take the VA Shuttle bus to the Portland facility. I was glad to leave the driving and the parking to them.

On a 40 some mile drive I spend some time in prayer, thought, and listen to OPBR (Oregon Public Broadcasting Radio.) I turned on my car radio during an interview between a broadcaster and the clothing designer from the television show “Mad Men.” I have never heard of the show before, have you? The interview sounded interesting and since I left my collection of George Jones at home I decided to halfway listen.

Apparently Mad Men is an American dramatic television series created and produced by Matthew Weiner. The series airs on Sunday evenings on the American cable network AMC and is produced by Lionsgate Television. It premiered on July 19, 2007, and is currently broadcasting its fifth season.

Mad Men is set in the 1960s, initially at the fictional Sterling Cooper advertising agency on Madison Avenue in New York City, and later at the newly created firm Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce.

The focal point of the series is Don Draper (Jon Hamm), creative director at Sterling Cooper and a founding partner at Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce, and the people in his life, both in and out of the office. As such, it regularly depicts the changing moods and social mores of 1960s America.

Apparently the “interviewee” was the “wardrobe goddess” for the show. She was responsible to clothe the characters in the period and in accordance with their positions and status in society at the time. I mention this for two (2) reasons. The first is apparently she is a “gabardine genius,” a “clothing consoeur,” a “wardrobe wizard.” She has won awards for her “vestment victories.”

The second reason I mention it at all is she “legitimized” my pet peeve, number 3. She was asked by the host, who was somewhat surprised by her answer, since she used such “formal” clothing on the set what did she think of the modern day trend of “casual?”

Her answer could have been mine. She thought we have gone way to far today in what we actually leave the house wearing. She thought that society as a whole no longer chooses appropriate clothing for appropriate settings. She thought casual clothing in certain arenas: 

• Demeaned the wearer
• Demeaned the event or setting
• Removed credibility from “offices” and positions
• Showed either a hidden or blatant disrespect 

Let me say those are my words in which I paraphrased her answers. However, I believe my paraphrased remembrance from the broadcast of yesterday is accurate. I think I am being honest.

What’s my point? My point is this; why can’t we as depraved, sinful, unworthy, wicked, light-hating, darkness loving, mercifully redeemed sinners who allegedly gather to give worship, honor, and glory to a most holy and majestic God get what this secular, unbelieving wardrobe wizard gets? Why are auditoriums filled with shorts, tank tops, holey jeans, and T-Shirts on people who are there to exalt the sovereign, edify the saint, and evangelize the sinner?

The Seven Most Deadliest Words in Church

Lethal Words Collection

"We have never done it like that!"

The Gospel According to Whom?

Is the bible the ultimate horror novel?

Today’s post comes from the “You have got to be kidding me” files of the Gospel-driven Disciples. The Rev Zahl, a retired Episcopal priest who was formerly the rector of All Saints Episcopal Church in Chevy Chase, MD, and who is the dean and president of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry, Ambridge, PA speaking of Stephen King, made this statement, “There’s a lot faith behind his fright.” Zahl believes that some of the most stirring affirmations of our Christian faith can be found in the chilling stories of author Stephen King.

Zahl cites several examples from various books by King to substantiate his claims that King is not an anti-religious horror story writer but a preacher of “grace in action.”

In a CNN article, The Gospel According to Stephen King, John Blake also quotes from the writings of both C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien. Blake writes, “In one interview, King said he was shaped by C. S. Lewis, author of The Chronicles of Narnia, and J. R. R. Tolkien, author of The Lord of the Rings. Both Lewis and Tolkien were devout Christians who layered their fiction with Christian themes.”

I feel no need to cite each example of this seemingly ludicrous idea, but his first example cited in a CNN story by John Blake is of the character John Coffey in the Green Mile.

First, Lewis was more than likely a believer although at times it is hard to understand his faith. However, Tolkien was a devout Catholic. Quoting Blake, I cite from his article, “Want to read a powerful mediation on Jesus sacrificial love? Check out how King links the death of the mammoth death row inmate John Coffey (note the initials, J. C.) to Jesus’ crucifixion in the “Green Mile.”  

Why are we looking for “Christianity” in the writings of Stephen King or any other author for that matter?  We find the definition and demonstration of Christianity not in horror novels but in the Bible. We see the definition and demonstration of sacrificial love in Jesus the Christ not in John Coffey, regardless of his initials.

What one misses when one attempts to read “the tenets of Biblical Christianity” into secular works of fiction is the meaning or the reason behind the events or the actions of the biblical text? It isn’t enough to see John Coffey’s death as sacrificial and then attempt to link it Christ’s death. Although Coffey was unjustly accused, wrongly convicted and executed as the Christ was there is no similarity. Coffey was a man, Christ was the God-man in the flesh, Coffey was a sinner in need of a savior, Christ was the Savior, Coffey’s death atoned for nothing, Christ’s death atoned for the sins of His people. The sacrificial death of Christ had eternal meaning and purpose. John Coffey’s death was a tragic miscarriage of justice.

When we try to “read into” the writings of various authors Christianity we are really legitimizing subjectivity. Each one who attempts to do this becomes the judge and jury of what represents what or who represents who.

Blake concludes his CNN article with this summary, “The Bible is filled with terror: demons, ghosts, floods wiping out making and the rising of the dead. Good horror examines the struggle between god and evil. The bible is the history of that struggle. The bible is in many ways the ultimate horror novel.”

No, Mr. Blake, the bible is not the ultimate horror novel telling an entertaining story of good versus evil. The bible is God’s history, or “His Story” revealing both His majestic and marvelous character and His eternal decrees and purposes as He reconciles mankind to himself.

“...Our Lord Jesus Christ added nothing to God in his essential being and glory, either by what He did or suffered. True, blessedly and gloriously true. He manifested the glory of God to us, but he added nought to God... Christ's goodness and righteousness reached unto His saints in the earth but God was high above and beyond it all....”

― Arthur W. Pink,

 The Attributes of God

Reflecting on the recent SBC Statement of May 31, 2012

Statement on Calvinism misses the mark

It is days like this that my heart grieves both for God and for his people. I know that God is truly able to take care of Himself and certainly is not dependent upon me to defend Him, His eternal purposes, and His character. Reading the “traditional Southern Baptist” statement on Calvinism grieves me terribly.

This is seemingly a response to what these SBC leaders regard as “New Calvinism.” I am not sure that I really know what “new Calvinism” is unless it is some guys who like to wear holey jeans, listen to grunge music, drink beer, and preach the doctrine of grace. I still think there is a large misunderstanding of what true reformed theology is and what the doctrine of grace is. The doctrine of grace is not a reformed theology although most reformed theologians subscribe to the doctrine of grace. For the record, I am neither a Calvinist nor do I hold to reformed theology. However, I am a committed believer in the biblical doctrine of grace, or the free grace of God.

Satan has been very clever making this argument develop to a divisive tool hinging upon the terms “Calvinism or traditional” soteriology. This statement, from May 31, 2012, sbctoday.com, shows how divisive this argument really is. Sadly, these men are both deceived and misled in regards to this monumental topic.

Jon Akin, pastor of Fairview Church in Lebanon, TN made this statement, “The SBC is big enough to include Calvinists and non-Calvinists…We agree on far more than we disagree on, so let’s unite and fight a common enemy.”

Akin’s statement and the SBC statement are froth with at least five (5) dangerous consequences: 

• They reduce the argument to “Calvinism vs. non-Calvinism” rather than biblical truth 

• They perpetuate the misunderstanding of several biblical doctrines 

• They force an unbiblical change in the understanding and presentation of the gospel 

• They perpetuate a high percentage of tares or false professions in the church 

• They rob God of the absolute glory in salvation giving men opportunity to boast 

It is important to get the doctrine of soteriology correct! God’s glory is at stake and man’s eternal soul is at stake. Thank God, He left nothing to us exclusively or no one would be saved. What one must understand is really at the very root of this question is first, the absolute glory of our majestic God and God head, but secondly, what you believe about salvation will determine how you will present the gospel. What you believe about the gospel will also determine how you “live out” your understanding of the gospel in daily life.

Why do you think the church is so weak and anemic today? Why do you think there is so little impact on our communities by the local church? Why do you think the church is either so worldly or “dead?” Why are so many churches today so similar to the church at Sardis? We still deny the doctrine of grace.

Thoughts On Choosing a New Doctor - Cheers!

After reading today’s paper I decided to look for a new doctor. No, there is really nothing wrong with my current doctor. I simply found out today that he is just not “hip.” Not only that, he isn’t always positive and at times he is just “old school.” There are times he actually has the nerve to say to me that there is something wrong with me or a part of me, especially parts of me that are inside and I can’t see. On top of that sometimes negativity, he wants to prescribe medicines that number one, I don’t have any choice in and number two, often taste bitter or sour.

See, what got me thinking about choosing a doctor was our local newspaper. Yep! Who know? The “religious editor” did a couple of feature stories on a couple of churches that were growing so fast they were busting out at the seams. One of my regular readers and commenters is Seams Inspired; she would know what that means. The praise for these pastors was unbelievable.

They were young and enthusiastic guys who didn’t wear nice clothes any longer. As a matter of fact jeans and T-shirts, even with holes were the norm. Talk about a positive message all the time! Nobody read, or spoke, or confronted, or admonished, or taught anything negative to anybody. I guess the music was off the charts.

Heck, my doctor always wears that white coat when he sees me. I have never seen my doctor in holy jeans; wait a minute I didn’t mean sanctified jeans I mean jeans with whole in them. Even though my doctor is a nice guy, he is always professional, calm demeanor, and always wants to see how I am doing. Then there is no exciting music in his office, just stuff that is calms you down and is somewhat soothing. Like I said he wants to be blunt, to the point, and wants to pin point problems and such. Believe it or not he is so judgmental; he thinks that I should lose a bit of weight to ensure longevity and good health. Don’t I have free will? Don’t I have the right to choose what I think is the right medicine for me? Does some diploma or graduate degree on his wall give him the right to meddle with my decisions about my health?

These churches are growing in our area because the pastors are so friendly and sincere. They don’t meddle and they actually let the sheep, I mean the people determine what they need best. It must be so exciting! Can you imagine a church where no one speaks a discouraging word, they don’t confront you on any issue, they are always upbeat, and you are whoever you are or whoever you want to be?

Yes sir, I think I am going to have to look for another doctor. It might be fun to have a guy not poke and prod around so much, confront me on various health issues, dresses worse than me, and has fun music. Hey, maybe I could write a song about it:

Making your way in the world today

Takes everything you got

Taking a break from all your worries

Sure would help a lot

Wouldn’t you like to get away?

(Where everybody knows your name!)

Rats! Somebody already did. Looks like Gary Portnoy and Judy Hart beat me to it. Oh well.

So, what do you think? Should I change doctors? Should I choose my doctor the way many people choose churches these days? What do you say?

Today In Church History

Happy Birthday Alexander Cruden

(May 31, 1699 - November 1, 1770)

Alexander Cruden's place in Church history is his contribution to Bible scholarship. A Bible concordance is a dictionary that lists the words that appear in the Bible and shows in what verses they can be found. When you consider how long the Bible is, you can easily see how useful such a dictionary must be.

The best concordance of Cruden's day listed the words with the verse numbers under them. As many as five hundred men had worked at preparing it. Cruden saw that he could make a much more useful version. Working all alone with scarcely a break for eighteen months, he wrote a new concordance. His great innovation was to quote a bit of verse around each word.

The first edition did not sell well. Cruden became depressed. Later editions of the concordance did much better. The famous preacher Charles Spurgeon said that the concordance was as necessary to a preacher "as a plane to the carpenter, or a plough to the husbandman."

Cruden died at 71. He was found kneeling by his bed with a Bible open in front of him.

Do any of you use a Cruden’s Concordance?

Is so, is your version software or the good ole book form?

When I was in Bible College, the joke was:

Strong’s (Concordance) for the strong…

Young’s (Concordance) for the young…

Cruden’s (Concordance) for the crude…