The Unlearning of the Will

Don’t you think we spend copious (ridiculous?) amounts of time debating the nature and extent of God’s sovereign will without hardly ever mentioning the sinful mess of our own wills? It appears to me that if the mind really is fallen and sin permeates every part of our wills (Rom. 7:21-25), it’s at very least rather handy and comforting to know that there is an exhaustively sovereign God who ‘works all things together for the good of those who love him’ (Rom. 8:28). I mean, doesn’t falleness necessitate sovereignty in a system of unconditional grace?

Rom. 12:2 tells us not to conform to the patterns of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of our minds. THEN you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is – his good, pleasing, and perfect will, [emphasis mine]. Thus in the renewing of our minds to become more like the mind of Christ (1 Cor. 2:16) we are transformed to a place where we can truly understand God’s will. Further, becoming Christlike in our minds is shaping our minds like the eternal sovereign mind of God, making our pilgrimage of Christlike holiness an eternal, inexhaustible path… i.e. there’s always more way to go!

In fact, the way in which Paul qualifies the quote from Isaiah 40 in 1 Cor 2:16 seems to suggest that to know the mind of the Lord necessitates having the mind of Christ. This is strengthened by the parallel immediately preceding this. Paul there tells us that no-one can know the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God, then goes on to tell us that we have the Spirit of God within us, thus our words are God’s words flowing from His thoughts/will (vv.10-14).

So it’s possible that the reason we’re so stuck in debating the nature and extent of God’s sovereign will is because we’re not discussing, sharpening, and encouraging each other to submit our wills/minds to God for his sanctifying. This is of course a process of grace.

Grace is unconditional, and entirely unmerited. We cannot earn God’s favour, we in fact are totally blind (2 Cor. 4:4) and dead (Eph. 2:1-5) before we meet God, and then when we meet Him we are His far off enemies (Luke 15:11-31; Rom. 5:10). However, in contrast to blind we have sight, to death we have life, and to our blind, dead will we a have God’s completely seeing, alive will. If God’s will was not all sovereign, then the renewing, transforming of my own will through grace alone and not by any effort of mine, would be impossible.

If we believe in Grace, then let’s begin by submitting our minds to God, becoming holy and blameless through Him in our cognitive self. If we seek to understand the will of God, and be driven by God-glorifying motives, then let’s begin with our sinful state and the work of Christ and submit our minds to Him. God’s exhaustive sovereignty is a sweet taste when it’s not viewed in a test tube but instead experienced as a need, and a cure to our sinful selves. When we view God’s character in a test tube, we approach it with a false objectivity. Lets observe ourselves, and submit to God; not the other way around.

Aggression and John 2.

So I’ve been working a lot recently with my youth groups on the place of ‘aggression’ in the hearts of young men, and what the Bible may have to say about it. A passage that keeps coming up is John 2:13-16 where Jesus cleanses the Temple. (Also see Matthew 21:12-16; Mark 11:12-19; Luke 19:4-47).

A key feature of this passage is it stands in dramatic contrast to the classic, westernised picture of Jesus as the ‘meek and mild, lamb-on-the-shoulder, socks and sandals’ kind of guy. Instead we have a picture of Jesus who makes a weapon, a whip of chords, and drives out those who were buying and selling in the Temple.

One member of my youth group responded to this passage by saying, ‘Well, He didn’t actually hit anybody though did he?’ It’s true, nothing is technically said about him physically ‘attacking’ anyone, however he has a weapon, he is driving people out, turning over tables, and scattering money. Thus it takes a lot for us to think Jesus was being careful not to hit anyone.

This represents much of what is taught to youth and children in churches these days. For instance, if a young person in a Sunday School (particularly a boy) shows any sign of aggression, immediately this young person is told off. Even if this aggression was defence from subtle and more worrying manipulation from another child, the aggression must be immediately snuffed out; rather than contextualised, replaced, corrected, or disciplined.

So because of this, when we get to the Temple cleansing, we need to first say, however obvious it may seem, that weapons making and using, table turning, and money scattering is an act of aggression.

Next we need to affirm that Jesus was totally without sin, never disobeyed the law, and only did what He saw His Father doing. Thus this act of aggression and its origins were not wrong or sinful.

So finally we need to think through the origins/motives of this aggression. Where did it come from, what did it spark? Lets start with what Jesus says…

“My house will be called ‘a house of prayer for all nations’, but you are making it a ‘den of robbers.’” [Mark 11:17].

This we know is zeal for His Father’s house consuming Jesus (John 2:17), but His choice of quotation is very important. The Temple was a whole load of things; it was a house of prayer, but perhaps more clearly it was a house of worship, of sacrifice, of meeting, of teaching; it was the house where God’s glory dwelled, etc.; so why does Jesus pinpoint on a house of prayer for all nations?

Jesus focus is on clear communication with God. This is what the Temple was, a place of communication with God. In fact, when you really think about it, all the Temple was was a place of communication with God. Sacrifices, worship, fellowship, teaching, were all used for the purpose of opening the people up to hear God's voice clearly, and then respond to Him appropriately.

In the same way now, Jesus, our Temple, is our place of communication with God. Godward Communication is clear, open, and not cluttered by hidden things. A ‘den’ of ‘robbers’ in contrast to this is a hiding place for people who wish to hide themselves, and hide their loot.

Thus, Jesus’ aggression is driven by responding to a cluttering of the means of communication with God. Its origins are to open up the communication channels.

This is especially important in light of the latter part of the first quote, ‘for all nations.’ All nations includes those outside Jewish nations who understand the Temple, the law, and the language of communication with God. The house of prayer should be so clear a communication space so all nations can find God accessible.

Furthermore, Jesus creates space in the Temple. He doesn’t just drive out the people; he drives out the animals, and turns the tables. He makes space. The aggression in Jesus made space; space for clear communication with God.

This seems to me to be a good parable of and test for Godly aggression. Is aggression always wrong, and where can it be right? Jesus used aggression here; it was motivated by responding to a cluttering of a means of prayer/communication with God. Put another way, it was motivated by seeing a lot of hidden things in a place where everything should be clear; the prayer space.

Jesus aggression came from and concluded with a longing to be close to, talk to, and hear from God clearly. Thus aggression can glorify God if it seeks to make space for God to be God, and to speak clearly. This can probably be applied in a variety of ways; I believe it should validate those who feel guilty because they know that should someone attack their wife/children, they would aggressively respond in order to protect. If it creates space for God’s love of justice, leadership, care, and self-sacrifice, then defending a loved one can be a righteous aggression.

However there is one far more accessible application from the passage and that is aggressively defend your prayer space. This doesn’t mean set booby traps around your bedroom; however it does mean passionately guard your heart and its space. Satan is a robber that desires your heart to be His den, and he will try to clutter up the space in your heart which should be used for prayer. Defend your prayer space. Spend time actively creating -space- to pray; go for walks so you can talk with God, get up the hour early, spend time looking at and mediating on God’s Word and God’s creation. Ask God to talk to you more clearly and show you hindering clutter. Meditate on the God you’re praying to, allow that to fill you up, and believe in the majestic privilege of prayer. Defend your prayer space.

Just one more application linked to this; defend your Jesus. In the same passage (John 2:19-20) Jesus refers to Himself as the Temple. Our house of prayer now is Jesus Christ. He is the Temple, the only way to the Father. It is through Him we come to God. Spend time with Jesus and you will spend time in the perfectly clear house of prayer. So read His word, meditate on His life, and think deeply about His last days on earth.

This deep thinking, meditating, getting up and hour early, forcing our minds on the Bible etc., takes a good deal of heart, and dare I say a deal of aggression also. Godly aggression creates space and that space is space to talk to and hear from God. So don’t simply snuff out aggression, instead ask yourself, ‘does this aggression make things hidden, or create space for God.’ The beauty of this question is it takes a lifetime to work with and grow with; so start with God. Why don’t you pray now that God will teach you about all the areas and reflexes of your heart so you can more fully and completely know Him.

My Fav. Bubblegum Greetings Card Company Poem

' When sometimes things don't go too well
You're the butt of people's rants
But don't get down or even frown
just smile and then shout "pants!" '

The mystery of God found in the fathomability of Creation.

A popular apologetic idea is that creation is not-fathomable, but mysterious. Thus there must be a God. - The easy response to this is 'we'll figure it out' thus God-of-the-gaps philosophy comes in, academia fills in the gaps and squeezes God out of the picture. Needless to say its not a very good apologetic to start with. The apologetic should run, creation is fathomable, thus God is not, therefore God *is* God.

The very mystery of life itself is not that its mysterious, but that it is fathomable. Its fathomable because it is revealed. A revelation from the divine creator. In every hum and whistle, branch and bark there is the imprint of the eternal attributes of God. Mystery does not stop with creation (nor ideally should it start there), the magni-finitude of creation all bears the fingerprints of the magni-infinitude of another, and thats where mystery exists in its true form; the being, nature, person, and character of God.

Creation (contra to popular belief) is exhaustible, because its exists in time and space, it has bounds and contexts. It of course is not exhaustible or even attainable apart from revelation, but the fact remains that all is revelation. God however is not created, all things were made through him, thus, He is not made.

This is what sets Christianity apart from all other eastern religion, and new-age westernism. We don't stop at creation. As much as life, and essence flows through all things and connects all things, that is not an impersonal 'Soul of the World.' The very essence is not creation itself - it is creator. Behind every finite piece, there is infinite person. The eternal God.

Language In Its Purity: Creational/Communicative?

As a believer in Sola Scriptura, I love Words, the Word of God is indeed infallible and the final uncompromising revelation of God. However as a musician and a poet I believe Words are not black and white, in fact as a note can sing a thousand songs, a word can progressively colour and create God's true revelation.

Sometimes it seems, Reformed writers talk about the Sola Scriptura as the 'exegetically exhausted doctrines of God' rather than the living, breathing, fluid, inspired, universally-and-intergenerationally-applicable, creational, double-edged (s)word it actually is. Or, another way, if we apply all our exegetical techniques to verses x, y, and z, and derive at a premise or two in those verses, that is the meaning of this portion of God's Word. Now there are 31,103 verses in the Bible, and if we apply this principle to all of them we will have exhausted God's revelation; and perhaps therefore the finality of God-revealed also in no time at all, a couple of gifted exegete's lifes work perhaps. There is obviously a problem with this.

The first words spoken were God's words, and they were creational, i.e. they created. Every time God spoke, something was made, light - stars - earth - plants - people - laws. When man spoke however, he named things so as to communicate. God's language was creational, it was man who made it communicative. Thus when man overdoes communication (Genesis 11) God disrupts what? ... their Language! Their abilities of communication.

God's language however is creational. This creational language is profoundly metaphoric. A metaphor can be thought of as an illustrative, poetic use of language which gives substance to something which isn't readily seen without the metaphor. Thus everytime God spoke in creation it was a metaphor, for the true form of the words did not exist until they were uttered.

Metaphor, Poetry, and sometimes even Parable is often viewed in evangelicalism as a form of lesser language, at best fluffy, and at worse dangerously-misinterpreting. However, responsibly embrace, the language of metaphor is far closer to the language of God than the language of communication. It still sends shudders down my spine to see how some exegetees exhaust meaning and prose and doctrine from lamentations, and the psalms, and parts of Isaiah, without ever mention the movement in the language, the meter, the rhyme, the allegory, the illustrations, the metaphor; the poetry.

Language in its purity is pre-Babel, it is creational, it is Godlike, it is focally-metaphoric. Do read God's word as creational language, seek to understand the poetic as more than just poems, and do speak to God from the metaphoric-language center of your heart.

The Pentatonic Scale and Godly Communication

Godly communication; that is communication to and from God, not communication about God, can be perhaps likened much more readily with music than with words, the latter in submission to the former.

The pentatonic scale is the mother of all blues and rock and roll, it is the Guitar-Soloists dream, and the Celtics heartbeat. In its most basic form a pentatonic is a scale with five pitches per octave. For instance a G pentatonic would have the following notes: G (root), Bb, C, D, F. During mastery of this scale the notes would be played in order at a certain tempo over, and over, and over. This gets the musician to recognise and retain the scale though logic, sound, and physical habit.

But this is not the end, and not the music, because once the scale is mastered and its forms/boundaries are submitted to, there is no end to its musicality. The notes can be played in any order, with any eventuality of tempo, over any timing and chord structure. Techniques can be added, and 'feel' can be introduced. The more a piece of music is 'felt' the more the music communicates. Heart - owns - this scale. Notice that the notes themselves are not changed, in fact in order for the music to be felt, the individual notes must ring out all the more clearly.

God's eternal attributes are clearly seen since the creation of the world, not in communicative-words, but in nature and image and sound and sense and experience (Rom. 1:19-20). Thus deep truths of God, enough to know Him, are revealed in means of communicate expressed in ways other than words. These things stir and communicate not just to our reason, but deep to our hearts. Do we 'understand' God in a sunset, or do we 'experience' His assurance (as taught in His word) in our hearts? God supports His truths with our hearts. Our heart/feelings are not the context for truth, they are the truths (or notes), themselves, 'played with feeling.'

The difference between dry truths and heartfelt truths is how they exist in our beings, how they are played. Are they static and repeated, or moving and dynamic? Scales are never meant to remain in order, they are meant to backbone music, to colour and create music, to be ordered and move in ways which makes us 'feel each note.' If the notes are the truths, then we must hold them, interweave them, resound, resonate and sustain them to create the music that holds our heart. Only then will we retain and love these individual truths.

The pentatonic scale as a scale of heart, teaches us this. Our heart when filled with truths (notes in the scale) and Spirit (playing the notes) breathes sounds to God, it sings and colours our words, it makes sentences real and not simply recited, it makes works worship and not duty.

At what level do we communicate with God? Do we pray/act out of a legalistic exegetically-exhausted thesaurus of words/actions (a repeated and ordered scale), and expect them to move us? Or does our moved, Spirit-filled and steered heart submit to, take, offer, sacrifice, bless, hold, and play the words and actions as creational-musical-living-language to God? Do we embrace God in prayer as we embrace the movement and melody of our favourite song? Do we caress the heart of God like our fingers caress the fretboard of our guitars? - Does he communicate to us through static scale, -or- dynamic solo? How do we feel when God reveals himself to us? Static?... or moved?

Submit your heart, your life, your circumstances, and your realities to God. Let Him stir your heart where it is meant to be stirred. Don't let His truths remain static, allow them to penetrate your heart, and allow you heart to be stirred up within your life, circumstances, and realities.

Teenagers on the edge of the Kingdom

'Can I buy a fag off yer?'

I shrug, and exhale slowly with my mouth closed, as if I wanted nothing better than to sell this young man a cigarette.

'Sorry mate I don't smoke.'

He turns away, I walk on around the corner and past the familiar old house which I recently discovered was where my mother grew up. Coming back around the house I see another 13 or 14 year old boy, on a bike, a Liverpool shirt on sporting 'Gerard' on his back. He spares me a glance and turns away.

'Vicky!' He shouts, a booming, possibly taunting, whisper affect in his voice. Then he disappears into the adjacent alley. I continue, now walking back towards the park I just came from. The boys are still there, possibly approaching me.

'Thought you didn't smoke,' mocked one as the others grinned.

'Just saw you with a fag' another joined, although he was cut off mid sentence from the lad that approached me before I rounded the corner just before,

'Where'd you get that lighter'?

I grinned what I thought was a charitable grin, then continued on my way into the park as the lads continued on their way. I of course don't smoke, they didn't see me smoking, and I wasn't carrying a lighter.

Going further a teenage girl is trying to squeeze through the children's playpark boundary bars but getting stuck in the process. A similar aged lad, possibly older, in a spurt of misplaced or distorted chivalry jumps over them just next to her. A third girl walks away from behind them. There's a makeshift rope swing hanging from a tree on my path just past the young 'gymnasts,' I push it and listen to it swing on the tree as I pass by. I continue, out of the back exit of the park and onto a main road where yet more, and slightly older, teenagers are parading.

I'm sure many would find this pastime a little odd, perhaps even offensive. But watching young people is life to me. Not so much that they inspire me, or make me envy what they have. I don't. I don't even want to watch their culture so I can learn to become more of a part of it in order to reach them. No. Placing myself among them renews in me the burden for them, as people who should be inheriting the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, the savior. Being around them, behind them, in their 'natural habitat' makes the burden in my mind, not more fresh, but more raw. Some burdens are not meant to remain fresh. Some burdens are meant to sting, to bite, to grip, and to cling. This is, for me, one of those burdens.

Another thing I observe and 'catalogue' so to speak in these times, is the similarities and differences; between me and them, them and me, them and Christ, me in Christ and the world, Christ and the world. When it comes to me and them, the differences flow too easy, whereas the similarities are so much harder to process and deal with. 'God make me strong.'

I love these young people, and a yearn for God to keep them close to His heart, I will battle them into His kingdom, and tear Satan from them with my teeth if I must. But I feel God needs me to be more 'me' with them. To be the counter culture -with- them. Not of their culture, not an imitation of their culture either. I've seen 14 year old lads crumble under the piercing stare and wise words of an 80 year old, and I've seen 16 year old girls sit riveted at the feet of a 50 year old professor. I long to be the real, firmly gentle, Christ-like presence in their life. To be an arm and a shoulder, to share footsteps with, and to counter their world with Christ...and see who stands. It is Jesus in these young people that attracts me so tenderly, and Jesus who calls from them. And it is to Him who I must respond.

Reflections on the absence of borrowed words as thought stimuli. The Glory of God's Spirit-Fuelled mind.

I find myself in an odd place of present; for the first time in some years I have no access to my books. After graduating from seminary, my books were packed and remain packed as I'm now awaiting another move to London to start a new job. I find the absence of littered bookshelves, and smoulden-used books daunting and slightly intimidating. The places in which I found solitude, wisdom, and general grace-empowered fuzziness are sitting in boxes in lockup 273 behind an old Hammond organ and several cases of clothes.
But God is good. My Spirit-owned mind is having to solidify its allegiance to God on its own prayer-fuelled searching. I need to stretch it not only through written gifts of inspired implications, but to the first pieces and causes provided usually by the big volumes of Jonathan Edwards, or the pencil-littered pages of John Piper. And I must tell you - the mind, devoid of borrowed words to be used as thought stimuli can be a real treasure chest of goodness and grace.
Now hear me right, I'm not saying the mind of tim gough or of any other human (other than Jesus) is especially gifted or movable...no, far from it; but the mind that is created by, filled with, and depending on God for sustenance is like a showering avalanche of admonishment and edification. Not just thought stimuli, but building and creating and life-changing grace.
So a word to all, who like me, love their books for Spiritual-encouragement. Use them with discretion as tools to receive understanding to more of the promises of life indeed... but do not neglect the power and gentle-grace contained in its own extensions. Sit. Walk. Be quiet. Think prayerfully. Love the prayers of a broad-thought mind. Worship God with all your mind.

Blessings.
t.

A Quick Note on Dissertation Posts

>>> If any of the posts from my dissertation are of interest to anyone let me know and I'll send a section with the correct editing and footnotes missing from these 'copy-and-paste' posts. <<<

Tim

Piper on N.T. Wright

'Jesus and Justification: Two Topics and Two Books Written
Which brings me to the labor side of the sabbatical. I was able to finish writing the main body of two books. One is called What Jesus Demands from the World, which will be published by Crossway Books in late September (Lord willing). It is a 365-page book on the commands of Jesus, in an attempt to obey Matthew 28:19, “Teach them to observe everything I commanded you.” Not just to know everything, but to observe (obey!) everything. How do you handle the Gospels in such a way that the teaching results in obedience? That was my goal. The other book is a response to N. T. Wright on the doctrine of justification. I have no immediate plan to publish it until I get the feedback from critical readers. My motivation in writing it is that I think his understanding of Paul is wrong and his view of justification is harmful to the church and to the human soul. Few things are more precious than the truth of justification by faith alone because of Christ alone. As a shepherd of a flock of God’s blood-bought church, I feel responsible to lead the sheep to life-giving pastures. That is not what the sheep find in Wright’s view of Paul on justification. He is an eloquent and influential writer and is, I believe, misleading many people on the doctrine of justification. I will keep you posted on what becomes of this manuscript.'

from: http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/TasteAndSee/ByDate/2006/1783_Thank_You_Thank_You_Thank_You/

Angels.

Why don't we think much about Angels in our evangelical world? This is something I really want to spend some time with. They appear all through the Bible and reveal some of the most interesting Biblical Theology! I generally take there presence as continued, available, and very important to the life of the Christian, particularly to learn from in how to serve and worship God, and to amend context to warm and assure the hearts of believers in Jesus Christ.

Surely we can learn so much from these beings in the Bible. They were created, like us, to Gloryfy God through their love, worship, and service of Him. Is that not our delight also?

I hope next year, after my dissertation is over, to spend some time examining Angels place in the Bible, and subsequent place now in Church life, practice, and teaching. But any thoughts that anyone has would be very much appreciated?

Intresting Thoughts from D. Field on Global Warming

http://davidpfield.blogspot.com/2006/08/global-warming-scepticism.html

- thanx David, v-helpful food-for-thought .