Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2012

321 and the Fall

321 is a an explanation of the Christian faith in three parts.

3 focuses on Trinity.

2 focuses on Adam and Christ.

1 focuses on union (or one-ness) with Christ.

321 is not structured around the gospel events.  Instead it unfolds the doctrines that explain those gospel events.  Without these doctrines, the events will be misunderstood and the goodness of the good news will be lost.

Last time we considered how 321 interacts with the event of Creation.

Without trinity, creation will be considered as the needy manufacture of a unitarian (and therefore taking) God – not the overflow of a trinitarian (and therefore Giving) God.

Without Adam and Christ, creation won’t be seen as part of the unified movement of creation-and-salvation, but a free-floating project.  Instead, with Adam and Christ, we see how very anchored the living God is to His handiwork.

Without union with Christ, we’ll think of creation in terms of distance and separation, rather than as something destined to participate in God’s own life.

Now we’re going to consider the fall.

How does 3 shape our understanding of the fall

Imagine that God was not Three Persons.  Imagine instead that for all eternity there was a solitary Individual.  If this unitary being brings anything else into existence, his deity would only be preserved by maintaining his absolute supremacy.  For creatures to correspond rightly to this god can only mean their being infinitely “other than” and “less than” a god who is defined over against his world.  If such a being creates then the creation has only one way to relate – it must submit.

What, therefore, is sin?  With a unitarian god, sin is not submitting to the power of the Sovereign.  (Perhaps you’re aware that “Islam” means “submission”).

But with a trinitarian God, what is sin?  Well in eternity this God has not been defined by supremacy but by sharing.  Having others alongside is not a threat to this God – it’s the very definition of His deity.  This God wants to share – to give us of Himself and to draw us in.

Therefore what is sin?  It’s refusing to receive from the generous God.

With a unitarian god, being distant is almost the definition of godliness.  With the trinitarian God, refusing His fellowship is the essence of sin.  And that sets a trinitarian gospel on a very different footing.  The problem with humanity is not, fundamentally, lack of obedience but lack of dependence.

Think of Jesus’ definition of sin in John 16:9: “that people do not believe in me.”  Our great sin is not receiving Jesus (remember that to believe and to receive Jesus is parallel, John 1:12).

Think of Paul’s definition of sin in Romans 14:23: “everything not of faith is sin.”  Again, sin is about not trusting the generous God.  He has given us His Son to be received by faith.  Instead we mistrust Him.  We close ourselves off from the giving God and now must handle life out of our own resources.

Flowing from this mistrust, we may then become mutinous rebels “shaking our fist at God”.  Sure, that might be one manifestation.  But we might also be meek self-haters, looking for love in all the wrong places.  We might be “trying to sit on the throne of our lives.”  Or we might be abandoning rule of our lives to all sorts of cruel masters.  Whichever way we turn, our sin is, first and foremost, our mistrust of God.  And it’s important to set up our gospel presentation in this way.  Because whatever we identify as the ‘problem’, it will decisively shape the ‘solution’ we offer.

If the ‘problem’ is “not obeying God” we have already implied the ‘solution.  Surely the solution will be “to start obeying God again.”  But no, the problem is that we don’t receive the Gift of God (Jesus).  For that, we are “condemned already.” (John 3:18).  But the solution is implied in the problem: “Believe in the name of God’s One and Only Son” (John 3:18).

How does 2 and 1 shape our understanding of the fall

When Augustine and Pelagius went toe-to-toe on the issue of our gracious salvation, Adam and Christ was at the heart of the debate. For Pelagius, we are not born in sin, we are born neutral.  We just use our freedom badly.  We choose sinful things, copying Adam’s bad example.

Now if this was the problem for Pelagius, you can guess what his ‘solution’ was.  Salvation was all about us using our freedom well.  We need to choose righteous things, copying Jesus’ good example.

Augustine saw this as a foul error – it denigrates Christ and exalts ourselves.  No – look at Romans 5:12-21.  We are born in Adam apart from any of our bad choices.  We are born again in Jesus apart from any of our good choices.  Our works just do not come into the equation.  Our second Adam has done it all – reconstituting damned sinners in Himself.

But in evangelism, Pelagius forces his way right back into our preaching.  We are reticent to speak of our union with Adam – it sounds anti-science, anti-reason and unfair.  (It’s none of those things by the way, I just don’t have time to address those questions now).  But in modern evangelism we neglect the bondage of the will and put our choices right back at the heart of the gospel.  We tell people that their bad decisions and deeds have separated them from God.  We might then tell of the work of Christ on the cross, but what we’ll really major on is the Decision which the sinner needs to make.  That’s where all the emphasis will lie.

And the sinner will be addressed as a free agent – they are Hercules at the cross-roads (pictured above), virtue lies in one direction and vice in the other, but it’s all down to them.  Whatever else we might have said about sinners being “lost” and “bound” and “blind” – we’ll forget that now.  Whatever else we might have said about Christ and His work being decisive, we’ve now moved on to the business end of proceedings.  The spotlight is unmistakably on the sinner.  It’s down to them.  They must refuse vice and choose virtue.  This is where salvation happens.

Does that kind of preaching sound familiar?

Why?  Why is there such a focus on decision-theology in modern evangelism?  Partly I think it’s because of the way we’ve set up the “problem”.  We’ve made the fall about behaviour (rather than being).  And we’ve located the problem within reach of the sinner.

But if it’s about deeds and decisions and if it’s about me then… how is Jesus the solution?  Perhaps Jesus can give me a really good talking to and perhaps He can persuade me to “Make a Decision”.  But at the end of the day, that kind of salvation happens in me, not in Him.

The true gospel is so much better than that.  The problem is far deeper than my behaviour, it’s about my very being.  It’s also “above my pay grade”.  The problem is out of my hands – it’s in a humanity in which I am culpably complicit.  But I can’t remake myself.  I can’t solve human nature.  The problem is deeper than I can handle and it’s also way over my head.

But then, so is the solution.  Just as I was caught up in something bigger than me, so now in Jesus I’m caught up in something bigger still.  The problem was out of my hands but so is the solution.  And that’s good news, because if it was down to me I’d spoil it.

Hear the gospel according to Adam and Christ: In Adam, though you’d done nothing bad, you were disconnected from God and cursed.  In Jesus, though you’ve done nothing good, you are reconnected to God and blessed.

This is the gracious gospel according to Paul, according to Augustine, and according to centuries orthodox Christian theology of virtually every stripe (…except, I’m tempted to say, evangelists!)  But if we deny this teaching our understanding of ourselves becomes shallow, the human will becomes sovereign, Jesus and His work becomes incidental and the gospel becomes an ultimatum.

Let’s get the problem right.  Only then will we have a solution that’s truly good news.

Next time we’ll consider the work of Christ according to 321…

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

It’s happened three times in the last three weeks, so let me give you a composite account of the conversations…

— [Embarrassed biting of lip] Umm… I know I should know the answer to this… And I feel really silly for bringing it up.  I realise it’s, like, really basic… but it’s been bugging me for ages now:  How do I Have A Relationship With God?

— What do you mean?

— Well I know it’s not about rules.  I keep hearing that Christianity is not a religion, it’s a relationship.  Well, ok.  But how do I Have A Relationship With God?  It sounds so stupid that I should ask that.  I know this is Christianity 101.  It makes me wonder whether I’m even a Christian.  But when people talk about “having a relationship with God”, I kinda know what they mean.  But I’m not sure I have what they’re talking about.  What are they talking about?

— To be honest, I don’t really know what they’re talking about.  And I wonder if they know what they’re talking about.

Yes, that’s really how I’ve been answering this question.  Really.

Which will make you wonder whether I’m even a Christian.  I mean honestly, who could possibly be against having a relationship with God??

Well I’m not against enjoying the gift of relationship with God.  But I’m dead set against definitions of Christianity that throw the spotlight on me and my relationship with God.  That might sound like a trivial difference.  Actually it’s all the difference in the world.

Don’t get me wrong, I know the living God – a personal God – I hear Him in His word, I speak to Him in prayer.  I enjoy fellowship with the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  Honest, I do.  It’s great.  All a wonderful gift that’s mine in Jesus.  Fantastic.

But if I have to “have a relationship with God” then I’m stuffed.  Seriously.  I’m hell-fodder if ‘relationship with God’ is up to me.

Let’s put the exact same truth in slightly different terms and you’ll see what I mean:  I love the law. It describes the good life of loving God and loving neighbour.  Brilliant.  And I have performed good works which the Father has prepared in advance for me to walk in (Ephesians 2:10).  And that’s been a lot of fun.  Yay law.  Yay works.  Yay.  But if I ever start talking about ‘the heart of Christianity’ as ‘me obeying the law’ then let me be accursed!  If I ever say “People get the wrong idea about Christianity, it’s not about ancient rituals, it’s actually all about legal obedience” – you’ll instantly realize my error.  Well, it’s just the same when you say “It’s not about being religious, it’s about Having A Relationship With God.”

And you’ll say – No, Glen, you’ve got it backwards.  Religion is about rules – yuck.  But Christianity is a totally different thing.  It’s all about relationship.  It’s not the same thing at all!

To which I’ll say – Really?

Really??

I understand that the essence of Christianity is not my outward works (so far, so good) – but then I’m commonly told that it’s about the quality of my inner devotional life towards God.  Do you see what’s happened?  We’ve come to a different swamp, but we’re still sunk.  We’re still lost in ‘works righteousness’, it’s just there’s a different flavour to the ‘works’.  Before it was all about outward, ritualistic hoops.  Now I’m being told it’s all about inward, pietistic hoops.

Well Hallelujah!  Don’t you feel the chains just falling off you?  Rejoice, you don’t have to perform physical acts, only mental and spiritual ones! Is that the freedom the gospel brings?

No, it’s just a different kind of slavery.  And in some ways, it’s an even deeper slavery.  That’s why Christians, furtively, secretly, wonder to themselves (and sometimes they wonder it aloud to visiting Christian speakers) What is this Relationship With God I keep being told to manufacture?  And why is it spoken of as liberating when all I feel is condemned by it??

Because, seriously, who on earth can have “a relationship with God”?  Where would you even begin?

Look at the person in that photo at the top. Are you like them? Can you do what they’re doing?

And if you could manage it, what, precisely, would be the point of Jesus?  Do we really need “the One Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus”?  Is He actually crucial to our Christianity?  Or perhaps He just gets us in the door and then leaves us to get on with the main work of Christianity: having a relationship with God?  Is that it?

No! The priesthood of Jesus is absolutely vital to understand. And this is what I’ve told my questioners when they’ve asked. The good news is this: We, by nature, are sunk in self and sin and have no chance of a relationship with God. But Christ is our Mediator who became Man for us, who lived our life for us, died our death for us and rose again to the Father’s right hand for us. He now lives to intercede for us, carrying us on His heart the way Aaron carried the sons of Israel on his (Exodus 28:29).

Jesus is the true David – the true Man after God’s own heart. Now, by the Spirit, I am swept up into Him – carried on His heart while He enjoys the ultimate heart-to-heart. I am included in the true God-Man relationship – not because of any devotional aptitude or inclination on my part. It is a sheer gift of grace given freely in Jesus.

I have a relationship with God. The good news is that it’s not my own relationship, which would be as fickle as my feelings. No the relationship I have with God is Christ’s relationship with God.

Some don’t like this way of speaking.  They think it diminishes a warm and personal walk with God. The opposite is the case. To know that I have Christ’s relationship with the Father is where my personal walk begins. Secure in Jesus I can enjoy my status as a child of God. I can even join in with the Spirit’s constant prayer: “Abba, Father.” But none of this is a relationship I must manufacture. It’s the grace in which – FACT – I now stand through Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 5:1-2).

So this is what I said to my questioners. Don’t look within, trying to find a relationship with God. You won’t find it in you. Look to Christ – your Mediator, Advocate, Intercessor and Priest. He is your relationship with God. To the degree that you know you’re on His heart, you’ll feel Him in yours.

Read Full Post »

I wasn’t asked about the conquest of Canaan during Thursday’s debate. But if I was, here  are 5 minutes worth of thoughts prepared in advance. (Quite a bit was taken from Paul Copan’s Is God a Moral Monster?)

There’s not a Christian in the world who doesn’t read Scriptures like Deuteronomy 20:16-18 without a lump in their throat.  But this jarring sensation does not come in spite of their Christianity, but precisely because of it. Christians don’t need to step outside the bible to learn the infinite and intrinsic value of human life. We don’t need humanist ethicists to tell us how to treat our enemies.  Jesus Himself has taught us:

“Love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, bless those who curse you, bless and do not curse them, turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, if your adversary sues you for your coat, give him the shirt off your back, don’t pick up the sword, those who live by the sword will die by the sword, my kingdom is not from this world otherwise my followers would fight for me but my kingdom is not from this world, the kingdom of heaven is within, etc, etc.”

Atheists haven’t taught Christians to be sensitive to the spilling of blood, Jesus has.  And, never forget, Jesus has taught both believers and unbelievers of the West exactly the sensibilities that make these ancient stories so difficult to our ears.  We look back at these three and a half thousand year old stories and find it almost impossible to think ourselves into their war-like worlds.  A massive reason for that is the advent of Christianity.

Nonetheless, the Christian is faced with Jesus who tells us both to put down our own swords and to take up His book – the Old Testament.  Jesus emphatically tells us that these Hebrew Scriptures are His Scriptures.  We cannot have Him and not His book.  So how then do we read it?

Well as we go back to the OT, what we see are Canaanite cultures involved in child-burning levels of evil.  For four hundred years they are engaged in repugnant spiritual and moral wickedness. And, having given them four hundred years to repent of it – considerably longer than any other “just war” ever launched! – God visits them with a one off, unrepeatable judgement.

And it has nothing to do with ethnicity.  This is not genocide, there is nothing racial about this.  It’s about spiritual and moral evil which, when the Israelites are guilty of it, they too are conquered by foreign nations.  What we see is a God who gives the Canaanites 400 years to repent.  Every Canaanite who ever sought mercy from the Israelites was granted mercy.  It’s true that, prior to the conquest, there is language of total destruction and “giving over” whole cities to the LORD, actually the language of “driving out” the Canaanites precedes and predominates over language of “wiping out.”  Copan argues that this is militaristic hyperbole that, even within the Bible, is fulfilled in non-literal ways.  i.e. the Canaanites just weren’t wiped out (nor were the Korahites).  The narrative of the wars does not describe non-combatants being killed (Copan argues that Jericho and Ai were fortresses – military installations if you like).  And when Joshua sums up his achievements he considers that he’s done what Moses had commanded – this, in spite of the Canaanites not even being wholly driven out, let alone “wiped out.”

Now there is still a bloody intensity in these stories that confronts our placid, peace-time sensibilities.  And there is a fearfulness to the judgement of God falling here in history.  But if we tell God he should do more about the evil of this world and then He gives us a one-off, unrepeatable pre-figurement of His righteous judgement – we can’t then complain at His intervention!  God can bring judgement.  God does bring judgement.  God will bring judgement.

If you read the OT you realise God is not a Rotarian.  He’s not an old softy.  There is blood and fire and justice to the Living God.  But when you read the NT you get the same.  Jesus is not Sweet.  But neither does He allow us to take justice into our own hands.  Jesus absorbs the fire and the justice on the cross.  He sheds His own blood for His enemies and as He does so He prays “Father forgive them.”  The Kingdom He brings is one of cheek-turning, enemy-forgiving, love. There is blood-shed in Christ’s kingdom – but it’s our own blood shed in place of our enemies.  There can be no Christian genocide.  That is a contradiction in terms.

On the other hand, what is it about atheism that absolutely rules out mass murder? What if it really achieved a greater goal for the species?  What if it would preserve more favoured races in the struggle for survival?  Is it at all possible that a mass murderer could justify their actions as consistent with a thorough-going atheism?   They wouldn’t win humanist of the year, that’s for sure.  Certainly, no atheist I know wants to do such things, nor do they want to provide any justification for it.  But can such evils be perpetrated consistently within atheism?  I contend that the answer is yes.  Therefore the problem of genocide does not lie in millennia old Hebrew wars.  It lies in the here and now.  And the answer is not to jettison Jesus or His book.  Instead we need to return again to the Crucified PeaceMaker.

 

Read Full Post »

Where are all the union with Christ songs?  Well Dominic White’s done us all a big favour with “All the Promises of God.”

Sweet as a nut, insanely catchy with a beautiful simplicity to the words:

We are chosen in the Chosen One
Blessed in the Blessed One
We are loved in the Loved One
And adopted in God’s only Son

CHORUS
For all of the promises of God
Find their “yes” in Him. (repeat)

We’re made holy in the Holy One
We’re made righteous in the Righteous One
We are strong in the Mighty One
And anointed in the Anointed One

CHORUS

BRIDGE
The Spirit unites us to Jesus Christ
In whom we have eternal life (repeat)

We have died in the Pierced One
We are raised in the Living One
We’re set free in the Free One
And we’ll reign in the Reigning One

CHORUS

.

Read Full Post »

It’s apparently the death-knell for all theists: Parasites! Grotesque, painful, life-destroying Parasites!

Take this website for instance (from which the photo is taken). It proudly declares its content to signal “The Death of a Loving God.”

I was part of a debate on Thursday discussing “Is God worthy of worship?”  One of our opponents, crowd-sourcing his material from eager Twitter followers, spent his talk listing some of nature’s ugliest monstrosities.  Horrific diseases and deformities were rattled off in quick succession.  At points he played it for laughs, and he got them.

Which ought to make us think.  If this is really being raised as the “problem of evil” why are comfortable westerners, sipping red wine in an Oxford College, sniggering about such horrors?  Is this stuff really evil?  In which case let’s treat it seriously as a challenge to belief in a good God, recognizing that all of us face such wickedness.  Or is it not really evil?  Is it just a freak-show, an object of macabre fascination, or – God forbid – an exercise in apologetic points-scoring?  If it isn’t actually evil, perhaps the lesson we should learn is ‘Abandon all hope and adjust your expectations accordingly.’  Well, ok.  But a) drop the secret (or not so secret) glee regarding creation’s monstrosities, b) realise you’ve solved the problem of evil but only by losing the right to call it “evil” and c) brace yourself for a much harder intellectual problem: the problem of good (of which, more shortly).

In all this, the greatest mis-step in the parasites conversation is to ignore (often times wilfully) the doctrine of the fall.  To imagine for a moment that we can simply read God from creation is to engage in the kind of paganism roundly condemned in Scripture.  As Francis Spufford says in Unapologetic: 

To anyone inclined to think that nature is God, nature replies: Have a cup of pus, Mystic Boy.

The world is fallen.  It is corrupted, cursed, ‘knocked off its axis’, disconnected from its true Life-source.  To speak of parasites in the world does not put the merest dint in the Christian world-view.  It only supports it.

Think about parasites.  We’re dealing with creatures that are, well, parasitic!  In fact 5 minutes’ meditation on parasites will pretty much give you the Christian doctrine of creation and fall.

These things cause monstrous perversions, hellish corruptions, wicked deviations from what should be.  The disease and death they bring is not Right, it’s wrong.  This is not Light, it’s Darkness.  There is an original and ultimate life-giving source.  And there is a secondary distortion which takes life.

This is the Christian doctrine of creation and fall: an original good perverted into corruption and death.  Good is ultimate, Evil comes later to steal, kill and destroy. The Light is ultimate, the Darkness is a privation of the Light. First there is a straight line from which all crooked lines are corruptions.

But here’s the thing: to judge a line “crooked”, what exactly is “straight”?  And if you want to avoid the conclusion that there is an Original Straightness to things, you might say “Ok, these lines aren’t definitively crooked, it’s just that everything’s messy.” Well ok, fine, but at that point you’re not wrestling with the problem of evil any more.  You’re just saying “Things are messy.  Stuff happens.”

And then you have to face a much greater intellectual hurdle: the problem of good.  You see evil – as a secondary corruption of good – is not intellectually difficult to understand.  (It’s horrifically unpleasant and evokes understandably emotive reactions – but intellectually it’s origins are understandable).  On the other hand, Good – if it’s not original and ultimate – becomes extremely difficult to explain.  This is because Good and Evil are not symmetrically opposite to each other. They are like light and darkness – light can illuminate darkness, darkness cannot darken light.  Darkness is the absence or obscuring of Light in a way that is not true the other way around.

I’m speaking of light and darkness figuratively here, but they are powerful illustrations:  When the Christian is asked “Where does the darkness come from?”  They answer: “From a turning away from the light.”  When the atheist is asked “Where does the light come from?” the answer “From the darkness” seems absurdly improbable.  If light does exist then it needs to be there from the beginning.  But this is the Christian account of reality.

The atheists are right: parasites are powerful illustrations of the problem of evil.  But they’re also a perfect analogy for how evil works.  It works derivatively off of good.  But once you’ve said that, you’ve essentially told the Christian story of the world.  There’s something Good and Life-giving and something came along to spoil it.

From Creation and Fall, the Christian can explain both good and evil.  But if our “creation story” is effectively: “slime + struggle + selfishness” with no injection of an original Good, it’s quite a stretch to end up with “selves, sentience and symphonies.”

Parasites are horrible.  As they work their way through the eye-ball of an 8 year old boy we are appalled.  This is not simply painful, not simply ugly, not simply maladapted to life – it is wrong. 

But let’s also remember, parasites are parasites!  There can’t be parasites “all the way down“.  No, there is an ultimate and original Good by which to judge these things evil.  And the Christian can hate this evil with a holy and almighty antipathy for we are seeing the work of God’s enemy – an enemy Christ opposes with every drop of His own blood.  We do not shrug our shoulders or snigger or adapt ourselves to the inevitable.  We call evil evil and we fight it.

Read Full Post »

Tweets continued…

“There’s no evidence…” says the atheist when they mean “I consider there 2b insufficient evidence of the kind I’m prepared to consider…” >>

<<There’s a great difference between those statements and you’d want the vocal champions of “evidence” to be able to grasp it.

“God’s love does not find but creates what’s pleasing 2 it.. Rather than seeking its own good God’s love flows forth & bestows good.” Luther

God does not treat you as your sins deserve (Ps 103:10). He treats you as Christ’s righteousness deserves. (2 Cor 5:21) #EnjoyYourDay

God *has* given u His all – His very Heart – on the cross. He gave it while u were His enemy. What will He now withold from u? #EnjoyYourDay

Jesus is not nice. He’s ferociously good, fiercely protective, jealously loving. His love is bloody. That’s why u can trust it #EnjoyYourDay

The Father knew & enjoyed His identity as Father b4 & apart from work (creation). We too shd know & enjoy our identity b4 & apart from work

“Who He is, we become. Where He is, we dwell. What He has, we inherit. What He’s done, we possess.” #UnionWithChrist http://bit.ly/R45ypE

He came to a poor teenager, a northern backwater, a ravaged people. He came to diseased, dying, damned sinners. He’s for you.#EnjoyYourDay

You want 2b free? The greatest threat 2 yr freedom is not the state, the market or the church. It’s you. You need 2b liberated from yourself

What was the Trinity doing in eternity past? Hide and Seek: Prov 25:2; 1 Cor 2:10-11

I don’t belong to a theological camp. All Christ-honouring theologians belong to me. 1 Cor 3:21-23

All things are yours – all theology, the whole world, the future – and you are Christ’s and Christ is God’s. 1 Cor 3:21-23 #EnjoyYourDay

How to see a crowd: Harassed and helpless. How to see Jesus: full of gut-wrenching compassion. Matt 9:36 #ThereforeGo

When the aspiring ape ceases to think of himself as a fallen angel, perhaps he will inevitably resign himself to being an ape and then… become contented with his lot & ultimately even rejoice that the universe demands little more from him than an ape’s contentment (DBHart)

The God-man religion is replaced by that of the man-god, wresting divinity from the material of his humanity thru exertions of his will. DBH

Funny how evangelicals feel more able 2 cite Austin &Searle on speech-act theory than Barth (who coins the term in I/1)#HeWhoMustNotBeNamed

Feeling thirsty? Hungry? Spiritually empty? The sure mercies of Christ are yours: Isaiah 55 #EnjoyYourDay

The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet (Rom 16:20). #EnjoyYourDay

Like cold water to a weary soul is Good News from a distant land (Prov 25:25) That’s why sharing cold water is so rewarding (Matt 10:42)

Your handsome, righteous Warrior King is God from God. He’s soaked with the Spirit of Joy and He LOVES His bride: Psalm 45#EnjoyYourDay.

Remembering T Eagleton on Dawkins: Imagine someone spkg on biology whose only knowledge is the Book of British Birds.

Does heaven seem closed to you? No, Jesus has torn it open & brought you Home: Luke 3:21; John 1:51; Heb 4:14; 6:19; Rev 4:1.#EnjoyYourDay

Stockholm syndrome is a brilliant description, not of faith in Jesus, but of sin. We’re in love with our captors…

…But there is a “love that will not betray, dismay or enslave you but will set you free.” The love of One who gives Himself to liberate u

We MUST communicate the Fall better. Every pt last night revolved around a) prob of evil, b) denial of sin, c) absurdity of Future judgmt

We pray “through the mouth” of Jesus Christ our Intercessor. (Calvin)

‘Slime + Struggle + Selfishness = Selves + Sentience + Symphonies?’ Atheism doesn’t add up.

Read Full Post »

Happy Friday

 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »