Theological Musings

have just been asked to write an article for a magazine.  (I don’t know if I’m at liberty to disclose the publication, so I’ll err on the side of caution here.  I will say that it’s one that I’m honored to be asked to write for, however.)  And I could use some help.

The article that I’ve been asked to write is a brief history of several holiday hymns.  Specifically, I have been asked to write about one Thanksgiving hymn and several Christmas hymns.

I have a month to write the article (and it won’t be a long one — about 1200 words total), but I want to get started on it.  Here’s where I could use some input from you, my faithful and wonderful readers.

What are some Thanksgiving or Christmas hymns that are special to you?  In other words, what would be hymns of which you would be interested in reading the history?  The history of some hymns is well-known.  Others have lesser-known heritages.  I’m thinking it would be nice to focus on ones that aren’t especially familiar stories, even if they are familiar songs.  But I don’t have a huge amount of time to research, either, so I may have to bend on that!

Anyway, I’m open to suggestions.  Fire away!  And when the article actually gets published, I’ll be sure to let you all know.

Until next time,

steve

y good blogging buddy Tony Sisk has often posted some church signs on his blog that we have had fun “critiquing”.  And one time, in the course of the discussion, he pointed us to a blog that exists solely to document some of the very worst church signs.  The blog is entitled Crummy Church Signs, and the commentaries that follow the signs are often quite hilarious.

In the last week, I’ve started submitting some signs to the blog, and have enjoyed getting into that.  I thought that some of my readers might enjoy reading some truly awful church sign slogans, so I figured I’d share the link with you.

Need a laugh?  Go check out Crummy Church Signs.  And hopefully someday, I’ll actually get back to writing substantive material on this blog!

Until next time,

steve

any of my readers will recognize frequent commenter “ded”. David is a very close friend and brother and one whom I am honored to have as a regular reader and commenter.

On several occasions, I have teasingly told David that he should get his own blog because his comments are often (in my opinion) more insightful than my posts. Finally, he has consented to write a guest post here.

So, without further ado, here is David’s post entitled “A Changed God?”

Do New and Old Testament revelations of God contradict? No. It is more a correlated function such as the two sets of sprockets in tandem of a multi-gear bicycle.Consider the basic, ten-speed bike. The forward larger sprockets are two levels for gearing the chain toward the rear set of five. The New Testament is the forward set and the Old is the rear.

The rider’s feet interact with the pedals connected only to the front sprockets. The believer is directly connected with New Testament revelation, as it is Jesus’ death and resurrection that connect us to the Father. Applying one’s will to the teachings of Jesus is like pressing the pedals creating torque in the gearing system.

The two front New Testament “sprockets” are the two great commandments: love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength; and love your neighbor as yourself. These two commandments are singled out by Jesus as a summation of Old Testament law or the five sprockets in the back which are the Pentateuch. Christian living based upon Jesus’ two great commandments fulfills all that is needed.

One rides a ten-speed understanding putting the feet on the pedals connected to the front sprockets. It is enough. The bicycle will move forward. As increased understanding of the rear sprocket will increase efficiency using the bicycle, increased understanding of the Old Testament improves insight and understanding into the New.

For example, Moses’ final words to the Israelites before Joshua leads them into the Promised Land include, “It is the Lord your God who will cross ahead of you; He will destroy these nations before you, and you shall dispossess them.” Deut. 31:3. God’s continuing interaction with the Israelites from the book of Joshua through the history books encompasses other directions and other contexts to destroy various groups in Canaan. Further, as Israel fails to respond to God, the blessing/cursing dichotomy also described in Deuteronomy plays out.

Passages of God’s attitudes and actions toward the Canaanites and toward the Israelites themselves are used by some as evidence that God is cruel and vindictive. Christians even question this Old Testament revelation in an attempt to reconcile God between His “contrasting” Old and New Testament characteristics.

I believe explanations which require reconciliation of Old and New Testament revelation stand on a false assumption that God changed. If the two revelations are seen as two connected pieces that turn each upon the other, a fuller meaning is revealed.

Case in point; consider the Israelites being instructed to kill Canaanites. The Lord had determined to have a covenant people who worshiped Him. Mixture between the Israelites and these people of false beliefs would have served to entice those of the covenant to join in false worship. Further, along with these false gods came some fairly abhorrent human behaviors, namely sacrificing live babies by fire before Molech and both male and female temple prostitutes available for sexual activity as part of the worship of Baal.

Consider Paul’s first letter to Corinthian Christians which instructs them to shun a person who purports being a Christian but insists he or she is free to practice sexual immorality. Notice the same separation of those who belong to God from those who are involved in idolatry expressed through sexual behavior.

God’s attitude of preventing mixture has not changed from the Old Testament to the New. The noticeable difference is the New Testament does not require immediate stoning or other violence leading to death as it did in Old Testament. Did God change? No.

It is the effect of the crucifixion and resurrection. It isn’t that God changed either His attitudes or His methods. His physical entry into the world in the form of Jesus and the satisfaction of His perfect justice through Christ’s atonement altered humanity’s condition.

That is, people are slaves to sin. Once sin becomes practice, humans will not turn from such. The Canaanites would not change, and the Israelites were drawn into those false beliefs.

God had no alternatives to the destruction of people groups mired in false worship or punishment of the Israelites for idolatry before Jesus walked on the earth and ended His life as sin under the curse of God. With the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus breaking the power of sin and death, the human condition was enabled to respond to the message of God’s grace and love. God remained unchanged.

The two sets of gears of the Old and New Testament are not in conflict but function in tandem. Each turns on the other. We pedal with the front set, the New Testament and its revelation. There is no call for moving the pedals to the rear set of sprockets of the Old Testament. The Old Testament provides insight into New Testament faith and practice.

Even without such insight, one can place faith in Jesus and be released to live out the two great commandments. The New Testament clearly demonstrates that those of faith are now a part of the new covenant of grace. We live from the New Testament which is in line with the Old. Both are a revelation of the one true God, our Father, who remains unchanged.

Many thanks to David for taking the time to write this post. And all may feel free to comment on it here.

Until next time,

steve

et another entry in my “Wish I Had Written This” category… (It’s so much quicker than coming up with original posts, you know! hehe)

Dave Black is a man I wish I could spend huge amounts of time with in person.  I’ve had the privilege of meeting him on two occasions, and both times were all too short, yet wonderful.  I don’t say this lightly when I say that Brother Dave (as he prefers to be called) is one of the most godly men I have ever met.

His passion for missions/evangelism, his desire to seek our Lord above everything else, his warm brotherly love to those with which he comes in contact, his genuine humble spirit…this brother exudes the Spirit of God.  And I mean that very sincerely.

I have linked to him a couple of times in the past, and today, I would like to do so again.  His latest essay takes a completely different look at the term “continualist”, and comes at it from an angle that I had never really thought of.

Most of the time, the term “continualist” (or I have sometimes used, and seen is used, as “continuationist”) is only in reference to certain spiritual gifts, including tongues.  Debates rage over “cessationism” and “continuationism”.

But today, Brother Dave has honed in on the important aspects of true “continualism”.  He states up front that he is a “passionate continualist”.  But you have to read the context of the essay to understand what he’s talking about.

One paragraph, to whet your appetite:

I believe we ought to continue bearing a humble, faithful, and consistent testimony to Christ, as the early believers did. Let moderns appeal to the sensational and spectacular; even the early church knew of signs and wonders. But the greatest work of the church has not been the spectacular but rather the faithful day-in and day-out living of normal everyday Christians.

OK, I’ll give you one more (it was hard to pick samples, because the whole essay is excellent):

I believe we ought to follow the example of the apostle Paul and eschew the excellence of human oratory and any appeal to human wisdom. Nothing about the Gospel pleases this world – nothing! – and we are never so foolish as when we try to dress it up in the garish garments of this age.

Now, go read the rest of the article here!  It’s not that long, so you can do it.

Until next time,

steve