Sing before the Lord

When the priests of Malachi 1 ask the LORD how they have despised the LORD’s name and polluted Him, He answers by saying (v. 7-8), “Ye say, ‘The table of the LORD is contemptible.’ And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? And if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? Offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts.” They were bringing offerings before the LORD which they would not have brought before the governor.

One has to occasionally wonder, or certainly ought to periodically wonder, “If I were preparing a musical presentation for a dinner at the governor’s mansion tomorrow, would I do it the same way that I prepare and present my musical offering at church on the Lord’s Day?” Would I sing such that neither my wife beside me nor the guy in front of me can hear me? Would I refrain from singing because this song just doesn’t excite me anymore? Would my moment of practicing and my moment of actually presenting be one and the same?

The Psalmist makes clear that our singing is “before the LORD, the King” (Ps. 98:6). “Come before His presence with singing” (Ps. 100:2). We are not just singing with one another; we are not just singing to one another about the Lord. We are singing before the LORD, in front of Him. He is the Audience. So “whatsoever ye do,” including singing at church, “do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men” (Colossians 3:23).

Not Impressing the Lord

Combining I John 4:19 with the first and greatest commandment (Mark 12:30, Luke 10:27), we might say, “We love [the Lord our God with all our heart, and with all our soul, and with all our mind, and with all our strength,] because He first loved us” with His all. He initiated this covenant relationship. He loved us first.

Knowing that love is first and foremost an action before it’s an emotion, then loving God with all we’ve got means that our actions of obedience before the Lord is a response to His actions of grace toward us. So for corporate worship on the Lord’s Day, loving Him with all we’ve got means that we wear our “Sunday best,” present our tithes and offerings, and sing with all our might, not because we are trying to impress Him, as if we hope to present Him with something He’s never before seen or heard. He knows our thoughts afar off (Ps. 139:2), so how can we surprise or impress Him?

We are to “come before [the Lord’s] presence with thanksgiving” (Ps. 95:2); we are to “enter into His gates with thanksgiving” (Ps. 100:4); we are to “sing unto the LORD with thanksgiving” (Ps. 147:7). What are we giving thanks for? Well, what has the Lord done for you lately? We don’t have time to share all that God has done for even the youngest single covenant member here right now. But those things we have scheduled to do, the songs we have scheduled to sing, we can and must offer unto “the Lord our God with all our heart, and with all our soul, and with all our mind, and with all our strength,” … not because we can impress God; but we responsively offer our best with hearts of thankfulness to Him for giving us His best. Psalm 103:1-2 – “Bless the LORD, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits.”

Don't Vote the Lesser of 2 Evils

Our country is not in great shape right now; and, from what I hear, even more of our significant freedoms have been stripped away with the passing of the recent huge National Health Care bill. One of the factors that have brought us to this place is voting "the lesser of two evils." This is not just my opinion; please follow the logic.

When you vote "the lesser of two evils," you're already admitting that the one receiving your vote is evil. You're admitting that the candidate is not balanced (morally, politically, whatever). The candidate you did not vote for is far left of center. The candidate you did vote for is not nearly as far left of center, but he is still left of center. So even when the winning candidate is the one voted for by you and all the other "lesser-of-two-evils" voters, the center has just shifted. That lesser-of-two-evils position is now the new center.

So the next time you vote the lesser of two evils, you move the center a little more to the left again. You make small compromises.

"Take 3 baby steps toward the cliff."

"Mother, may I?"

"Yes, you may."

Just one baby step every 4 minutes (or every 4 years as the case may be) toward the cliff still gets you to the cliff. Perhaps it gets you there slower than taking giant leaps (by voting the greater of two evils), but you are still moving toward the cliff rather than away from the cliff.

It's 2010 already!?

I just realized that 2010 is more than half over, and I haven't submitted a single post yet this year. ... well, ... except for this one.

Baptized in Snow

Yep, I’m one of those who thinks an all-encompassing white blanket of pure snow is beautiful. So as I proceed to defend it, I must confess that I am a bit biased. I like snow. Not year round, mind you; but a month or two (maybe even three?), I’m fine with that. But someone may wonder, "Why? Why snow? What good possibly comes from it? And don’t say that spring comes from it, as if banging your head on a brick wall is justified by how good it feels to stop."

Well, I would like to contend that God offers snow as an annual baptism – a re-telling of the need for the old to die, for the dead to be buried, and for new life to spring forth afresh. In the fall, things do just that: they fall. They fall down and die. They get raked, burned, or composted. That from which they fell looks lifeless. In the winter, these lifeless forms and their detachments are buried, in some places six inches under, in others six feed under. In the spring, things do just that: they spring. They spring forth, up, and out. They become green and look happy to be alive.

Still skeptical?

What is snow? It’s frozen water, it’s white, and it’s cold. God has shown in numerous times and ways that He brings new life and new creations out of water. "In the beginning … the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters" (Gen. 1:2). "And God said, ‘Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear:’ and it was so" (Gen. 1:9). Then God started over with Noah and his family after covering the entire earth with water (Gen. 6-9). Then God gave Israel a new start by leading them with a cloud and bringing them through the Red Sea (I Cor. 10:1-2). Then John the Baptist, Christ Himself, and the apostles called people to signify their testimony of new life in Christ by being baptized in water. And, of course, babies announce to the world that a new life has arrived not very long after "the water breaks." So there should be no surprise that particular parts of our world look freshly new and alive after the frozen water of winter has receded.

So perhaps the symbolism is beginning to make snow more attractive to you, until you wonder, "But why cold? Why so cold? What beauty is there in coldness?" Again, I think the coldness represents death or at least the confirmation of death. When a body dies, it becomes cold; and vice versa: when things become very cold, they die. At absolute zero (which is probably pretty cold), things become inanimate, they stop moving. We bury things that are dead. And if they weren’t completely dead when we buried them, they will be. Death is essential. Why?

Enter white. If whiteness symbolizes purity, then why is something so deadly so white? Well, sometimes to rid the impurities from an object of desire, you have to destroy those impurities. Chemotherapy and radiation are attempts to kill cancerous cells. The problem with this is that chemotherapy and radiation do not simultaneously (or even eventually) replace those corrupt cells with fresh healthy ones. Replenishment must come via some other means. If that does not happen, then the entire body may die. – This is, of course, another way of achieving purification: rather than attack the particular impurities within the desired object, destroy the entire object itself – purification by death. When a field is covered with snow, no impurities are visible: no weeds, no bugs, nut’in’.

"But, but, -," you say, "but there’s nothing alive either! Yeah, there may not be any impurities visible, but neither are there any signs of life visible … in a field covered with snow or in a man consumed by chemotherapy. It may be pure now, but it’s dead. What good is that?"

Granted. But my point still stands. Purification, even if it’s by death, is still purification and can thus be symbolized by whiteness. But, given the overall picture, your point is still valid. "If there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. … For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." – 1 Cor. 15:13-19

But baptism with snow in winter happens at the beginning of the year. There is yet a resurrection in spring which we eagerly anticipate and plan to celebrate. But first, the dirty old man must die and become cold. And if he still twitches now and then after death, the coldness of burial will ensure that he completely dies. The world is now a bit purer, being cleansed from all unrighteousness. But remember: that is not the end of the story; it is only the beginning.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit" (John 12:24). "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new" (2 Corinthians 5:17).

And God graciously heaps upon us His reminder of this every year.

A Kingdom Metaphor

Christ Jesus is Lord of all. The Christian church is His bride.

Imagine, if you will, a benevolent king over all the known world, in the process of ridding such world of all the putrescent effects of a rapacious tyrannical adversary. If the compassionate conqueror is such the good king that he graciously bestows many good things on all his subjects, and especially on those who serve him wholeheartedly, then many would have no problem submitting to such a king. If his wife the queen were to pass through town, many would wish to behold her glorious beauty, the abundance of dazzling adornments with which she and her immediate surroundings are adorned, and the mass of entourage which accompany her to serve her. Now suppose she were to pass through every town and village within the kingdom, led by her husband with the best of his army, and preceded by heralds who announce to all peoples: "The king is coming with his queen! All those whose hearts are so inclined are offered a place and position of service. Loyalty to their majesty, as best expressed by extending grace to his other servants and subjects, will be highly rewarded. Refusal to submit to his gracious lordship or failure to respect his beautiful bride will be answered by severe punishment. All are invited and encouraged to accept his offer, no matter your current social status or physical condition. Poor and rich, sick and healthy, old and young, weak and strong, friendless and famous, – come one, come all!"

Now who wouldn’t want to serve such a king and queen, especially someone who recognizes that the only alternative is continued slavery to the aforesaid dictatorial foe, the final state of which is destruction?

Communion Is So Much More

How often have we been expected, upon receiving the bread and grape beverage, to close our eyes and meditate somberly upon the painful process of death through which Jesus Christ went because of His love for each one of us? How hard does the pastor or administering speaker have to work to inspire an emotional response in the participating audience? I wonder if this is one of the big reasons why many churches do not practice communion more frequently. Imagine if you had to think of something new to say every week in order to help people understand the significance of eating a piece of bread, explaining it to be Christ's body, and of drinking a shot-glass full of grape juice or wine, representing Christ's blood.

I remember a story that Ravi Zacharias told of a minister explaining to him that the reason they didn't practice a particular event (such as communion) more frequently in church was because they didn't want people to lose the sacredness of it or to treat it too lightly. To which Ravi aptly responded, "Do you take the same approach toward collecting the offering?"

If you had to come up with a communion exhortation every week and if you're pretty sure that you would find it challenging to come up with something new after about the third week, then check these out. There are well over four hundred exhortations from the pen and lips of Pastor Wilson regarding "The Lord's Table." Perhaps if you do ever have to come up with something new, you can just steal one from there.

God of the Means and the End

The following was submitted by Pastor Douglas Wilson (to his church via their email system and also on his blog) September 15, 2009:

********************************************************************************

"Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. The saying is trustworthy, for: If we have died with him, we will also live with him; if we endure, we will also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us; if we are faithless, he remains faithful — for he cannot deny himself" (2 Tim. 2:10-13).

Paul is a thorough-going predestinarian -- all the elect are predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. But he is no fatalist. Note what he is willing to do for the sake of the elect. He endures everything, he says, for the sake of the elect, so that they might obtain . . . what? What Paul believes them to be predestined to obtain is the salvation that is in Jesus Christ, along with eternal glory. Lesser hearts than Paul's reason fallaciously in one of two ways. They either say that enduring everything matters, so the elect must not really be elect. Or they say that election is real and that it matters, and that it is therefore not necessary to endure anything. Que sera sera. But Paul knows that God ordains everything, including the means that He has ordained to accomplish His intended ends.

Paul knows that the ordained destination is reached by the ordained road. And if the destination is reigning with him, then that is reached by enduring. If the destination is living with Him, the road is dying with Him. The saying is trustworthy. The God who ordained the harvest also ordained the planting. The God who ordained the pregnancy also ordained the sexual union. The God who ordained that a man reaps what he sows also ordained that a man sows what he reaps. Predestination does not make Paul shrug his shoulders whatever. It makes him roll up his sleeves, and any other response betrays a misunderstanding of what God has revealed.

There is a flip side, with an interesting twist. If we deny Him, He will also deny us. But if we are faithless (merely), He remains faithful. To be faithless to struggling sinners would not be to deny them; it would be to deny Himself. He will never leave us or forsake us -- despite our faithlessness.

Cordially in Christ,
Douglas Wilson

Hilarity in Parody: Redemption of Music

Running a couple errands with my 8-yr-old and 2-yr-old sons, scanning through the minivan's radio, searching for some fun songs, a popular song (to some) from a while back came on the heavy metal. Before the singer (if you wanna call him that) began, my 2-yr-old was already boppin' his head. (Frankly, I was enjoyin' it, too.) But before long, the singer was saying something about "a fast machine ... with those American thighs" who was "working double time on the seduction line."* Um, I'm pretty sure my sons weren't quite catchin' it all; but neither did I want my sons runnin' around the house all the next day, singing, "YOU -- shook me ALL - night - long ...."

I also happen to enjoy some of the music performed by a few other ungodly professionals. Douglas Wilson has said, if I understood correctly, that we'll likely still be singing Handel's Messiah even after the resurrection. -- Now that's a song that doesn't need redemption: no accompanying "ahem" or guilt. -- Douglas Wilson has also said that "whatever the world can do, the church can do, five years later and worse," which, if I understood correctly, means the world can do some things better, including making music that's fun to sing very loud and bop your head to while riding in an automobile. But when the lyrics are shameful, one finds himself wondering how this song might be redeemed so as to be enjoyed ... perhaps even after the resurrection.

Enter ApologetiX. These Christian musicians do a great job rewriting, reproducing, reforming, redeeming, ... well, just check out for yourselves these parodies of
AC/DC's "You Shook Me All Night Long" or
The Everly Brothers' "Wake Up Little Susie" or
Great White's "Once Bitten Twice Shy" or
Michael Jackson's "Smooth Criminal" or
... a whole bunch of others ...
and have fun.

===========================================================

* - "You Shook Me All Night Long," AC/DC. (Back in Black, 1980.)

Was Peter Piper a Thief?

Likely, they grinned, coolly yet leeringly, as they first rehearsed it for you:
...........“Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers.”

– It sounds so innocent, doesn’t it? Almost fun! – But have you ever considered: Perhaps Peter Piper picked that peck of pickled peppers from someone else’s pickled pepper patch? Was Peter Piper a thief?

Now I certainly don’t wish to start rumors that threaten another’s honorable reputation; but neither do I wish to pass on to my children the baton of desensitization toward the eighth commandment. If Peter Piper was a thief, my children need to know the truth.

My suspicions are not entirely indefensible. Children often pick up the habits of their parents, right? And sometimes they even take them to the next level, yes?

Well, we’ve heard it said that
...........“Tom, Tom, the piper’s son,
.............Stole a pig and away he run ….”
But is that really where the apostrophe belongs? Is Tom-Tom the piper’s son? Or is he the Pipers’ son (as in the son of Mr. & Mrs. Peter Piper)?

Now we know that Tom-Tom was a thief; the rhyme specifically tells us so. And he stole a pig, which is a rather large item. We know that. So adding the argument that children can take their parents’ bad habits to the next level, we begin to see that maybe, just maybe Tom-Tom’s dad – Mr. Peter Piper? – was also a thief. Perhaps he did not steal large items, like pigs. Perhaps he only stole small items, … like pickled peppers.

******** (At this point, you should just quit reading and scratch yer head ….) *******

.........

Perhaps we should petition Congress to allocate a little stimulus money toward an investigation of this matter. Heaven knows that it’s been used for less worthy causes.

How Free Is Our Will ... Really?

God did not consult me before founding the world. I made no decisions to affect the outcome of the first 5,000 years of history. I was not asked, “Into which era of history would you like to be born?” I was not asked, “Into which country, state, and city would you like to be born?” I was not given a choice of families into which to be born. Upon birth, I was not given options regarding my sex, my hair color, my eye color, my nose’s shape, my length, my weight, or even my name. Even for a number of years after my birth, I did not choose my clothing style, my meal items, the house rules, my church, or my school. I don’t tell the sun when to shine, the rain when to fall, lightning where to strike, tornadoes where to go, the snow when to come, earthquakes how big to be, or volcanoes when to erupt.

Any one of the above items can have – has had – a significant impact on my life (and the lives of others). All of them combined have had a VERY GREAT impact on my life. And yet I had no freedom to will any of these greatly-impacting events to happen or to not happen.
…
Oh, permit me to add one other (rather personal) item to the above list: I was not even permitted to choose circumcision or no …, not too unlike a Jewish boy before the Incarnation, and yet a good deal different from a Jewish boy before the Incarnation, Because Jewish boys before the Incarnation were expected to carry in their flesh the sign of the covenant which God had made with Abraham (Genesis 17), a covenant that the LORD would be a God unto Abraham, and to his seed after him. “And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep My covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations” (Genesis 17:8-9). – My parents are not Old Testament Jews, thus they were not motivated by such a requirement regarding my physical status. However, there is an important point here concerning something with the potential for a VERY GREAT impact on one’s life, eternal life at that.

A Jewish boy of 8 days old did not get to choose if he wanted to be included as a member of the people whose God was the LORD, the people who were to “keep God’s covenant therefore, them, and their seed after them in their generations;” thus, the boy did not get to choose whether or not to carry the sign of the covenant between God and His people. In short, this boy did not exercise free will in becoming, what some might call, an “Old Testament Christian.”

Now “if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious” (2 Corinthians 3:11). So if God in the flesh is much more glorious, – if His birth, life, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and coronation are referred to as “the glory that excelleth” (2 Cor. 3:10), – then how do we explain the rejection of children from receiving the sign of this more glorious covenant (that sign now being water baptism)? In the days of a less glorious covenant, they received it aside from their personal will. (Indeed, what child would have asked for circumcision?) But now, in the time of a more glorious covenant with God, children must wait until they can show that they understand what is happening with baptism. – I’m 36 years old, I’ve read the Bible cover-to-cover numerous times, I’ve experienced baptism, and I’ve witnessed many others; and I still don’t have a full grasp of what baptism is all about. Thanks to God for His grace in accepting me anyway!

I’ve seen a boy ask for baptism from his father, who is also his pastor, and be temporarily put off. The boy thought he was a part of God’s people, but his pastor needs assurance of the boy’s being able to provide somewhat of an adult understanding. Yet “Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, and said, ‘Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.’” – Matthew 18:2-6

More Recommended Viewing

Recommended Viewing

Warning: Potential Spoilers Contained Herein

When the main character speaks, things appear. There is power in the written word, power to separate companions, power to reunite them. The man has hope that the written story will bring about such a reunion. But the dark enemy doesn’t want the story to finish as written, thus he sets about to destroy all such writings. So, for good to triumph, the author has to become a part of his own story, and he enters into the world which he created.

Am I talking about a particular principle contained within the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, or am I talking about the movie Inkheart*? Well, yes, both. That’s why I recommend that you and your children see this movie. The more sensitive among us will likely wonder how I can recommend a movie in which one of the characters says, “… damn …,” and in which one scene briefly shows some water nymphs, probably played by three naked women (<-- I’m not absolutely certain about this – when you watch it, hit the Pause and Zoom buttons on your remote, so you can inform me … better yet, just ScreenIt). Well, … there you have it. I’m recommending it, because of its most obvious point.

Inkheart certainly is not a perfect replica of God’s story. – How could it be? – It does have its flaws. One of the main ones likely regards the author. The Inkheart author is initially doubtful of the potency of his story being spoken, he is a bumbler, and he is compelled to revise his story. God, however, knows best of all the power of His words, God makes no mistakes, and, thus, He needs make no revisions. His story is perfect the first time around.

The movie & story would have been far better if the Shadow had succeeded in killing the author, only to have the author come back to life, according to the story, and explain that it had to happen because he had written the perfect story. Upon taking a brief glance at the theme of her other writings, I cannot at present if ever commend the actual author, Cornelia Funke, for reasons not now given. Also, the idea of using a movie to promote reading books begs to be discussed, but that, too, will have to wait for another time.

* - Inkheart, book written by Cornelia Funke, movie presented by New Line Cinema, and directed/co-produced by Iain Softley, (distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures, released 2009).

A Few Good Standing Pissers

(Ignore the YouTube uploader's title;  it's inaccurate.)

Love vs Lust

Lust desires a thing for its own self and no other, to consume upon itself. Lust conceives and brings forth sin which ends in death. Lust is self-focused. Even when a man pretends to be humble by reminding himself and others about how pathetic and worthless he is, he is still being self-focused.

God is love, and you are commanded to love your wife as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for it. Love gives itself for the one with whom the lover has entered into covenant. Love gives itself and lives on eternally. Love is focused on others. When a man is giving himself for his wife, he forgets himself.

Lust consumes upon itself. Love gives of itself. God is love. We were made in God’s image; we were made to be like God. Thus, forgetting ourselves, we are to love, to give of ourselves.