Psalm 9.1-2
Worship is like love: if we are concerned mainly with our own sensual experience of either, we have made them both self-seeking. Why do we worship? How do we love? How do we know we have done either? Must we have an emotional response in worship or love in order to know our experience in either arena is legitimate?
Many pastors and counselors have sat with a husband or wife who have, with grief and guilt, confessed to not loving their spouse any longer. When questioned about the meaning of such an admission, most answer that they do not "feel" for the other person what they once did. Therein lies the confusion. Feeling has been equated with love. Feeling is not love; feeling results from love. Indeed, the great mistake many make is to root their love for another solely on the basis of emotion.
A question that should be asked of those who declare they no longer feel for another what they once did. If we require a feeling in order to love, then who is love all about? If a feeling is absent, then I have declared that I am the focus of my love, not the person whom I am supposed to love. If I do not feel, then I am mourning the loss of my feeling; thus, love of that sort is self-centered.
If I am able to love solely because I feel something, then I have no concern for the person I am supposed to love. Their needs are meaningless to me; only my emotional need matters. Such a view totally distorts the biblical definition of love. First Corinthians 13 includes no sensual terms at all. Every defining word is cast in terms of commitment and loyalty. When I marry a couple, I challenge them in the following way. I ask each if they will take the other to "to have and to hold from this day forward, in sickness and in health, in poverty or in wealth; to love and to cherish so long as we both shall live. To this I pledge to you my faith." I have never, nor will I ever, ask anyone to base their marriage commitment on something as foolish as "as long as I love," or "as long as I feel love." Paul declared that "love never fails."
We have done the same injustice to worship. If I have been told once, I have been told hundreds of times by so many that worship was boring and they had not been fed. If people stopped long enough to consider the logic of such statements, they would slink away in shame. No one can make worship boring for a believer other than the individual himself. Now, a congregation’s worship may not be inspiring and may be bland, but I control my own enthusiasm. If I have been experiencing the works of God in my life, no one will be able to hinder my joy and gladness as I worship.
Seemingly, those who find worship boring are those who have idea what being a Christian means. Paul told the Philippians, "He who began a good work in you will perfect it . . . ," and "it is God who is at work in you . . ." If these verses be true, as we affirm them to be so, then each of us who has been saved is being perfected every passing day as God is at work in our lives. Now, the person who misses that may not be under construction by the Divine Architect. Further, if he is a person bored in his worship, he is bored in his life. Such a person’s life is static and unchanging, giving proof of no activity by God in him. God is bringing us to Christ-likeness through every moment and circumstance of life. How can one not be excited by that fact.
If one comes away from worship without the feeling he believes should have resulted from worship, he did not carry with him into the worship event the requisite emotions. We worship God because we are glad, joyful, excited, and enthusiastic about who He is, not in order to find joy. We have had his character affirmed to us daily as God has dealt with us through grace and mercy.
Love "rejoices in the truth." Worship must be "in spirit and in truth." Love and worship share a deep bond. We worship God because we love him. We are to be committed and loyal to him in all things. Our love for God is our purpose for existence. Even on days when we "feel bad," we can still worship. If we just consider for a moment what God has done for us, we can get over the bad feelings and find great joy.
Friday, August 25, 2006
Study 20 "Praise to Yahweh" Part 1
Psalm 9.1-2
David addressed this psalm to the worship leader "on Muth Laben." The meaning of "Muth Laben" is not known, although one scholar has suggested the term means "female voices." So, this hymn could have bee written for a women’s choir. Such a conclusion is entirely speculative, and should not be wholeheartedly adopted.
Nevertheless, this hymn was written for worship, not as a poem for contemplation. The nature of the worship as described by the psalm can be discerned in the five verbs used in the first two lines: to praise, to call out, to be joyful, to exult, and to sing.
Fundamentally, the character of worship as portrayed in Scripture almost always is joyful and enthusiastic. Contemplative, quiet worship is not a style presented often, if at all, in the Bible. Meditation on and intimacy with God are generally reserved for prayer; praise is typically lively and active.
The reason for worship having such an extroverted nature is tied to the object: the Most High God. David declared, "I will praise Yahweh with all my heart." The word praise is a term with the basic meaning of "to throw." What did the twenty-four elders do, as pictured in Revelation 4.10? They "threw" their crowns before the One Seated on the Throne. They praised him. That kind of activity is not what I would call passive worship.
Secondly, David spoke of "enumerating your extraordinary deeds." Again, we find a New Testament parallel in Revelation. In both chapters 4 and 5, the twenty-four elders declare the great works of both God and the Lamb. God had created and sustains all things (Rev. 4.11). The Lamb had "been slain . . . and made them to be a kingdom and priest to our God" (Rev. 5.9-10). Thus, both God on the Throne and the Lamb before the Throne are worthy to receive "blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever" (Rev. 5.13). One can sense in the text of Revelation, in all the descriptions of worship found in that book, the vibrancy and enthusiasm as God’s great deeds are proclaimed and he is worshiped.
Third, David wrote that he would be joyful and glad "in You." The Westminster Shorter Catechism poses the question "What is the chief end of man." The answer given is, "Man's chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy Him forever." To glorify God is to direct attention to him. To talk about him is to glorify him. Now,if one focuses only upon the Lord’s deeds, he will fail to see the true person of God. In other words, if we are interested only in what God can do for us, he is nothing more than an idol. But, if God’s deeds are understood as the lense through which to see his real character, then we can see the Most High God. We must do more than talk about what God has done; we must praise him for who he is, which is the basis for his great acts. To rejoice and be glad in only what God has done is selfish; we are interested in ourselves. To rejoice and be glad in him is to worship in spirit and in truth.
Lastly, David stated, "I will sing to Your Name, O Most High One." Here again, we can see, as in Psalm 8, that "name" is much more than a mere tag used for identification. Thus, to sing to the Lord’s name is to sing to God as he is known. In fact, the content of the songs we sing in our worship should consist of the praiseworthy character traits of God Scripture reveals. "Worthy of worship, worthy of praise, worthy of honor and glory." "Holy, holy, holy, merciful and mighty." "Immortal, invisible, God only wise, . . . Great Father of glory, pure Father of light." "Joyful, joyful, we adore Thee, God of glory, Lord of love."
Worship surely can and should contain songs about what God has done. Yet, to not sing to "His Name" is to miss the greatest joy of all: praising him for who he is, and, thus, to enjoy him forever.
David addressed this psalm to the worship leader "on Muth Laben." The meaning of "Muth Laben" is not known, although one scholar has suggested the term means "female voices." So, this hymn could have bee written for a women’s choir. Such a conclusion is entirely speculative, and should not be wholeheartedly adopted.
Nevertheless, this hymn was written for worship, not as a poem for contemplation. The nature of the worship as described by the psalm can be discerned in the five verbs used in the first two lines: to praise, to call out, to be joyful, to exult, and to sing.
Fundamentally, the character of worship as portrayed in Scripture almost always is joyful and enthusiastic. Contemplative, quiet worship is not a style presented often, if at all, in the Bible. Meditation on and intimacy with God are generally reserved for prayer; praise is typically lively and active.
The reason for worship having such an extroverted nature is tied to the object: the Most High God. David declared, "I will praise Yahweh with all my heart." The word praise is a term with the basic meaning of "to throw." What did the twenty-four elders do, as pictured in Revelation 4.10? They "threw" their crowns before the One Seated on the Throne. They praised him. That kind of activity is not what I would call passive worship.
Secondly, David spoke of "enumerating your extraordinary deeds." Again, we find a New Testament parallel in Revelation. In both chapters 4 and 5, the twenty-four elders declare the great works of both God and the Lamb. God had created and sustains all things (Rev. 4.11). The Lamb had "been slain . . . and made them to be a kingdom and priest to our God" (Rev. 5.9-10). Thus, both God on the Throne and the Lamb before the Throne are worthy to receive "blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever" (Rev. 5.13). One can sense in the text of Revelation, in all the descriptions of worship found in that book, the vibrancy and enthusiasm as God’s great deeds are proclaimed and he is worshiped.
Third, David wrote that he would be joyful and glad "in You." The Westminster Shorter Catechism poses the question "What is the chief end of man." The answer given is, "Man's chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy Him forever." To glorify God is to direct attention to him. To talk about him is to glorify him. Now,if one focuses only upon the Lord’s deeds, he will fail to see the true person of God. In other words, if we are interested only in what God can do for us, he is nothing more than an idol. But, if God’s deeds are understood as the lense through which to see his real character, then we can see the Most High God. We must do more than talk about what God has done; we must praise him for who he is, which is the basis for his great acts. To rejoice and be glad in only what God has done is selfish; we are interested in ourselves. To rejoice and be glad in him is to worship in spirit and in truth.
Lastly, David stated, "I will sing to Your Name, O Most High One." Here again, we can see, as in Psalm 8, that "name" is much more than a mere tag used for identification. Thus, to sing to the Lord’s name is to sing to God as he is known. In fact, the content of the songs we sing in our worship should consist of the praiseworthy character traits of God Scripture reveals. "Worthy of worship, worthy of praise, worthy of honor and glory." "Holy, holy, holy, merciful and mighty." "Immortal, invisible, God only wise, . . . Great Father of glory, pure Father of light." "Joyful, joyful, we adore Thee, God of glory, Lord of love."
Worship surely can and should contain songs about what God has done. Yet, to not sing to "His Name" is to miss the greatest joy of all: praising him for who he is, and, thus, to enjoy him forever.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Study 19 "Who Is Man?" Part 2
Psalm 8.3-9
Those who view life from the perspective of evolutionary thought have an essentially negative perspective on life and mankind. Humans are the product of an impersonal process directed by spurious, unplanned circumstances. Ironically, from the view of evolution, man is a victim. We have evolved this strange sense of self-awareness, yet, are no better than a bug. We can try to clean up the world and reverse global warming, yet, as we try to fix the earth’s environment, some unexpected, unforeseen event still could wipe us all out. Talk about sad!
Since we can claim no right to supremacy, then no particular product of man’s thoughts should be viewed as superior in its concepts. Democracy is not better than dictatorship, capitalism is not more worthy than communism. Further, no religion can claim ascendency. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, animism, Confucianism, et al are all the same: man’s misbegotten ideas about a god who is not there. Thus, let us all eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. As John Lennon sang, "nothing to live or die for." How sad and pointless.
The biblical view of life is diametrically opposed to the concept of life intrinsic to evolution. Christianity and Judaism are essentially positive in their outlooks. For the Jews, one could live well in the land by obeying the commands of God. For Christians, Jesus has promised an abundant life (not to be confused with material prosperity). For all who believe the truths of the Old and New Testaments, God is in control of all things and will, in the end, bring his purposes to pass. As bad and inept as mankind might be, God insures the viability of all life.
God has shown incredible interest in the welfare of his creation. He has put man in control of it, while at the same time insuring that creation itself cannot be wholly destroyed by the human race. What man must understand, and generally does not, is that he is steward, not owner. Since man is the steward of creation, he is accountable to God for his management of his resources. How we use what we have determines how we live. Tithing, by the way, is the believer’s admission of God’s ownership and man’s stewardship.
History is replete with examples of man’s poor stewardship. Take the Mayans, for instance. Located in Central America and the Yucatan, their kingdoms once flourished and dominated that region. The ruins of their great cities still engender amazement in tourists as they flock to places such as Chichen Itza. When the Mayans built those great edifices, they coated them with a kind of lime plaster. Unfortunately, massive numbers of trees had to be cut down to fuel the fires needed to make the lime. Ultimately, their commitment to the decoration of their buildings depleted the trees. Mayan civilization imploded and the cities died.
Ironically, archeologists face an unusual hurdle in their attempts to study the Mayan ruins: trees. The tropical forests returned with a vengeance. They literally ate up the cities, covering them in a sea of green leaves. The Mayans failed as stewards; they mismanaged their resources for foolish reasons. God did not fail; the trees returned. The natural world will survive with man, without man, or in spite of man.
Evolutionists have a fundamental lack of confidence in humanity (their only hope is their own elitist schemes). Man has made a mess, and as a collective, cannot be trusted to fix it. Scripture also teaches that man is, at times, untrustworthy: all sin. Yet, even in our evident failure, we have hope in God. Since the evolutionists reject the very idea of god, they are without hope and desperate. As human beings themselves, how can they believe their idea of survival is any better than anyone else’s?
Did David conclude than man, with respect to his position in the world, was worthy of adulation and adoration? No, his answer was, "O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name in all the earth" (Psa. 8.1,9). God and God alone is to be worshiped. In God, man finds meaning for himself.
NOTE: Please go to Edmond's Study Helps and view the post of the lyrics of the song "Imagine" by John Lennon along with comments. The song illustrates well the evolutionary mindset.
Those who view life from the perspective of evolutionary thought have an essentially negative perspective on life and mankind. Humans are the product of an impersonal process directed by spurious, unplanned circumstances. Ironically, from the view of evolution, man is a victim. We have evolved this strange sense of self-awareness, yet, are no better than a bug. We can try to clean up the world and reverse global warming, yet, as we try to fix the earth’s environment, some unexpected, unforeseen event still could wipe us all out. Talk about sad!
Since we can claim no right to supremacy, then no particular product of man’s thoughts should be viewed as superior in its concepts. Democracy is not better than dictatorship, capitalism is not more worthy than communism. Further, no religion can claim ascendency. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, animism, Confucianism, et al are all the same: man’s misbegotten ideas about a god who is not there. Thus, let us all eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. As John Lennon sang, "nothing to live or die for." How sad and pointless.
The biblical view of life is diametrically opposed to the concept of life intrinsic to evolution. Christianity and Judaism are essentially positive in their outlooks. For the Jews, one could live well in the land by obeying the commands of God. For Christians, Jesus has promised an abundant life (not to be confused with material prosperity). For all who believe the truths of the Old and New Testaments, God is in control of all things and will, in the end, bring his purposes to pass. As bad and inept as mankind might be, God insures the viability of all life.
God has shown incredible interest in the welfare of his creation. He has put man in control of it, while at the same time insuring that creation itself cannot be wholly destroyed by the human race. What man must understand, and generally does not, is that he is steward, not owner. Since man is the steward of creation, he is accountable to God for his management of his resources. How we use what we have determines how we live. Tithing, by the way, is the believer’s admission of God’s ownership and man’s stewardship.
History is replete with examples of man’s poor stewardship. Take the Mayans, for instance. Located in Central America and the Yucatan, their kingdoms once flourished and dominated that region. The ruins of their great cities still engender amazement in tourists as they flock to places such as Chichen Itza. When the Mayans built those great edifices, they coated them with a kind of lime plaster. Unfortunately, massive numbers of trees had to be cut down to fuel the fires needed to make the lime. Ultimately, their commitment to the decoration of their buildings depleted the trees. Mayan civilization imploded and the cities died.
Ironically, archeologists face an unusual hurdle in their attempts to study the Mayan ruins: trees. The tropical forests returned with a vengeance. They literally ate up the cities, covering them in a sea of green leaves. The Mayans failed as stewards; they mismanaged their resources for foolish reasons. God did not fail; the trees returned. The natural world will survive with man, without man, or in spite of man.
Evolutionists have a fundamental lack of confidence in humanity (their only hope is their own elitist schemes). Man has made a mess, and as a collective, cannot be trusted to fix it. Scripture also teaches that man is, at times, untrustworthy: all sin. Yet, even in our evident failure, we have hope in God. Since the evolutionists reject the very idea of god, they are without hope and desperate. As human beings themselves, how can they believe their idea of survival is any better than anyone else’s?
Did David conclude than man, with respect to his position in the world, was worthy of adulation and adoration? No, his answer was, "O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name in all the earth" (Psa. 8.1,9). God and God alone is to be worshiped. In God, man finds meaning for himself.
NOTE: Please go to Edmond's Study Helps and view the post of the lyrics of the song "Imagine" by John Lennon along with comments. The song illustrates well the evolutionary mindset.
Study 18 "Who Is Man" Part 1
Psalm 8.3-9
Are the heavens the work of God’s "fingers?" If God did create the heavens and the earth, as Genesis 1.1 affirms, what can be concluded about man’s place in the created order?
In the modern age, the twentieth and twenty-first centuries in particular, man has been living under the delusion of evolutionary theory. As a result, the place of humanity in the natural world has been significantly redefined from what Scriptural declares.
For the psalmist, man’s ascendent position in creation was a paradox. Relative to the heavenly realm, man is entirely insignificant. David wondered why God had given mankind even a second thought. The enigma for David was the exalted role of human beings in the natural world, and their seeming insignificance relative to the star-filled heavens.
David realized man’s role in the world did not correspond in any way to his essential nature and physical being. David was keenly aware of man’s weaknesses and limitations. Yet, he saw that humanity ruled in the natural and physical realm. Humans can manipulate material resources to their advantage in a manner wholly inconsistent with his being. Why? How did man gain such an advantage. Why had God put man in the position he holds?
To those who accept the unproven, counterfeit claims of evolutionary theory (What great or not-so-great scientific discovery can evolution claim?), man is a mere accident of circumstance. Human beings possess no greater significance than any other living creature.
"A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy," a statement made by Ingrid Newkirk, President, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), is a logical extension of evolutionary philosophy. How does a boy differ from any other animal? To the honest evolutionist, man, in his essential being, is not better than a beetle, a beaver, or a brook trout. Consequently, we have no inherent claim over the natural world. Of course, one wonders what the evolutionists at PETA claim as the basis for their authority to speak for animals other than man?
Ironically, the biblical definition of mankind’s essential nature is not so different from the definition offered by evolution. Genesis declares that God brought forth "living creatures" in the sea and on the land. Later, when Adam was made, God defined him as a "living being." Interestingly, "living creature" and "living being" are the translation of the same Hebrew word, nephesh. So, even the Bible recognizes the bond we share with the beasts of the fields and seas.
At that point, thought, the biblical and evolutionary models part ways. Since the fundamental precept of evolution is that God does not exist (we all know God and science cannot interfere with one another), man cannot assert his superior position in the natural order. Since humans, as with all other living things, are products of an impersonal process, we are locked into and limited by that process.
The biblical view is vastly different. God exists and has created all things. Scripture declares that truth as certain. The Bible does not argue for God’s existence, the Word affirms God’s existence. If the two truths of Genesis 1.1 are in fact not true, then the rest of Scripture becomes meaningless speculation with no more authority than the works of Dr. Seuss.
Yet, man’s role in the world is clear; we are superior. But, why and in what way are we superior? Upon what basis does mankind rule over the earth and all that is in it?
Are the heavens the work of God’s "fingers?" If God did create the heavens and the earth, as Genesis 1.1 affirms, what can be concluded about man’s place in the created order?
In the modern age, the twentieth and twenty-first centuries in particular, man has been living under the delusion of evolutionary theory. As a result, the place of humanity in the natural world has been significantly redefined from what Scriptural declares.
For the psalmist, man’s ascendent position in creation was a paradox. Relative to the heavenly realm, man is entirely insignificant. David wondered why God had given mankind even a second thought. The enigma for David was the exalted role of human beings in the natural world, and their seeming insignificance relative to the star-filled heavens.
David realized man’s role in the world did not correspond in any way to his essential nature and physical being. David was keenly aware of man’s weaknesses and limitations. Yet, he saw that humanity ruled in the natural and physical realm. Humans can manipulate material resources to their advantage in a manner wholly inconsistent with his being. Why? How did man gain such an advantage. Why had God put man in the position he holds?
To those who accept the unproven, counterfeit claims of evolutionary theory (What great or not-so-great scientific discovery can evolution claim?), man is a mere accident of circumstance. Human beings possess no greater significance than any other living creature.
"A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy," a statement made by Ingrid Newkirk, President, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), is a logical extension of evolutionary philosophy. How does a boy differ from any other animal? To the honest evolutionist, man, in his essential being, is not better than a beetle, a beaver, or a brook trout. Consequently, we have no inherent claim over the natural world. Of course, one wonders what the evolutionists at PETA claim as the basis for their authority to speak for animals other than man?
Ironically, the biblical definition of mankind’s essential nature is not so different from the definition offered by evolution. Genesis declares that God brought forth "living creatures" in the sea and on the land. Later, when Adam was made, God defined him as a "living being." Interestingly, "living creature" and "living being" are the translation of the same Hebrew word, nephesh. So, even the Bible recognizes the bond we share with the beasts of the fields and seas.
At that point, thought, the biblical and evolutionary models part ways. Since the fundamental precept of evolution is that God does not exist (we all know God and science cannot interfere with one another), man cannot assert his superior position in the natural order. Since humans, as with all other living things, are products of an impersonal process, we are locked into and limited by that process.
The biblical view is vastly different. God exists and has created all things. Scripture declares that truth as certain. The Bible does not argue for God’s existence, the Word affirms God’s existence. If the two truths of Genesis 1.1 are in fact not true, then the rest of Scripture becomes meaningless speculation with no more authority than the works of Dr. Seuss.
Yet, man’s role in the world is clear; we are superior. But, why and in what way are we superior? Upon what basis does mankind rule over the earth and all that is in it?
Friday, August 11, 2006
Study 17 "How Majestic Is Your Name" Part 4
Psalm 8.2
In Psalm 8, the poet made some significant affirmations regarding the acts of God. First, the Lord has displayed his name throughout the earth and above the heavens. Thus, God has declared his omnipresence. God is not "in" the natural world; the Psalmist was not an animist. God is understood in what he has done, but is not limited by his creation. He dwells not in rocks and trees, birds or butterflies; he lives in and through his people.
Second, the Psalmist affirmed the omnipotence, or sovereignty, or God. "You have established strength." Two possibilities exist for understanding God’s establishment of his strength. First, one might see this phrase as describing how God accomplished, or brought into being, his strength in the world: through the mouths of children and nursing infants.
A second possibility presents itself. God established the fact of his strength, in that, he proved or displayed convincingly his power. The key to choosing either proposal rests in how one understands the role of children and adversaries.
Who is the enemy of God? We immediately respond, "Those who hate God." That is correct as far as it goes. Yet, we must realize that all of God’s enemies do not "hate" him, if we mean hate as a deep, visceral anger.
Many of God’s worst enemies are good, moral, religious people. To hate is to reject. Religious people have in fact disregarded God. What they focus on is their ability to properly carry out certain prescribed rituals. So, anyone who has attempted to manipulate God by their "programs" has, in fact, hated him. If we believe we can make churches grow and work by our own efforts, we have disregarded God; we have ignored, or hated him.
In the NewsMax article I cited in an earlier blog, the observation was made that "Once a congregation reaches a critical mass of around 2,000, its numeric strength alone becomes a powerful attraction. It becomes self-generating. Size begets growth."* So, the overriding concern for any church, then, is to become big in order to become bigger. "It becomes self-generating" is a truth rooted in mass-marketing principles, not Scripture. Has bigness become a god?
Ironically, the goal of any congregation should be the development of its membership into greater Christ-likeness. Being a big church can become an end in itself, and the spiritual growth of believers an adjunct of size. We may have lost sight of what kind of growth is more important.
Seemingly, we are attempting, by our proven effectiveness at "growing" churches, to "establish" God’s power. Our programs, location, worship style, and ministerial personalities have replaced biblical principles as the foundation for the church. As a result, pastors and ministerial staffs experience incredible anxiety due to the pressure to "grow" the church.
Yet, the Psalmist stated that God proves his power through children and nursing babies, not sophisticated media personalities and marketing specialists. Why children? When the issue of greatness in the kingdom was raised, Jesus observed that "unless you . . . become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."
Paul was perplexed by being unable to rid himself of his "thorn in the flesh." He had prayed diligently, but to no avail. Odd, Paul prayed for the "thorn" to be removed, but God did not take it away. Instead, he let Paul’s disability remain. Why? "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness." God is not so much concerned with our ability to make churches big as he is with our willingness to trust him as a child. Then and only then will the real strength of God be revealed.
The italics are mine.
In Psalm 8, the poet made some significant affirmations regarding the acts of God. First, the Lord has displayed his name throughout the earth and above the heavens. Thus, God has declared his omnipresence. God is not "in" the natural world; the Psalmist was not an animist. God is understood in what he has done, but is not limited by his creation. He dwells not in rocks and trees, birds or butterflies; he lives in and through his people.
Second, the Psalmist affirmed the omnipotence, or sovereignty, or God. "You have established strength." Two possibilities exist for understanding God’s establishment of his strength. First, one might see this phrase as describing how God accomplished, or brought into being, his strength in the world: through the mouths of children and nursing infants.
A second possibility presents itself. God established the fact of his strength, in that, he proved or displayed convincingly his power. The key to choosing either proposal rests in how one understands the role of children and adversaries.
Who is the enemy of God? We immediately respond, "Those who hate God." That is correct as far as it goes. Yet, we must realize that all of God’s enemies do not "hate" him, if we mean hate as a deep, visceral anger.
Many of God’s worst enemies are good, moral, religious people. To hate is to reject. Religious people have in fact disregarded God. What they focus on is their ability to properly carry out certain prescribed rituals. So, anyone who has attempted to manipulate God by their "programs" has, in fact, hated him. If we believe we can make churches grow and work by our own efforts, we have disregarded God; we have ignored, or hated him.
In the NewsMax article I cited in an earlier blog, the observation was made that "Once a congregation reaches a critical mass of around 2,000, its numeric strength alone becomes a powerful attraction. It becomes self-generating. Size begets growth."* So, the overriding concern for any church, then, is to become big in order to become bigger. "It becomes self-generating" is a truth rooted in mass-marketing principles, not Scripture. Has bigness become a god?
Ironically, the goal of any congregation should be the development of its membership into greater Christ-likeness. Being a big church can become an end in itself, and the spiritual growth of believers an adjunct of size. We may have lost sight of what kind of growth is more important.
Seemingly, we are attempting, by our proven effectiveness at "growing" churches, to "establish" God’s power. Our programs, location, worship style, and ministerial personalities have replaced biblical principles as the foundation for the church. As a result, pastors and ministerial staffs experience incredible anxiety due to the pressure to "grow" the church.
Yet, the Psalmist stated that God proves his power through children and nursing babies, not sophisticated media personalities and marketing specialists. Why children? When the issue of greatness in the kingdom was raised, Jesus observed that "unless you . . . become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."
Paul was perplexed by being unable to rid himself of his "thorn in the flesh." He had prayed diligently, but to no avail. Odd, Paul prayed for the "thorn" to be removed, but God did not take it away. Instead, he let Paul’s disability remain. Why? "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness." God is not so much concerned with our ability to make churches big as he is with our willingness to trust him as a child. Then and only then will the real strength of God be revealed.
The italics are mine.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Study 16 "How Majestic Is Your Name" Part 3
Psalm 8.1-2
In an earlier posting, the use of parallelism by the authors of the Psalms was noted. Psalm 8.1 is another example of that literary device:
"How majestic is your name in all the earth,
Who have displayed Your splendor above the heavens!"
First, let’s look at the two words majestic and splendor. At first sight, we might think these terms are synonymous. Yet, that is not the case. Actually, name and splendor are the synonyms, or, parallel terms.
Majestic has the sense of broadness or loftiness. So, throughout the earth, the name of God can be discerned. What further proof do we need in order to see that "name" implies more than an identifying tag. We know "the name" of God through the revelation of that name in Scripture. We can know about God’s name, his character, by considering the natural world.
Paul stated, "that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made."
Now, God’s love and grace are not expressed or known through the created order. Those are known, in their highest expression, through the Son. As John stated the case, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. . . grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ."
Paul clearly stated that what has been shown to the human race is the "eternal power and divine nature" of God. In other words, the loftiness of God, his wide, unfathomable nature. While school boards and faculty councils debate the relative merits of the theory of evolution over against the theory of intelligent design, Scripture simply affirms that in creation, God has expressed a certain part of his character in order that human beings might place the proper value on themselves. God is the one who is charge, he is the magnificent one. So, this Psalm poses a sobering question. Having considered God’s majesty, David asked, "What is man, that you give him even a thought?"
David and Paul agreed: one need only consider the complex beauty of the natural world to know of God’s existence. Further, one can see, in the vastness of the heavens, more proof of God’s great name. Splendor can mean the light and glory God wears as a king. Thus, the splendor of God which is above the heavens, is visible for those who would see it. His splendor is "above the heavens" not in a spatial way, in the sense of being over or on top of, but in a transcendent way. God’s splendor is of greater significance than the heavens. When one looks at the stars, one sees beauty that points to a greater reality. The sun, moon, planets, stars, and galaxies are merely expressions of the power and divine nature of God.
The Tower of Babel was a testimony to mankind’s over-estimation of himself. In building that edifice of egotistical delight, the people declared, "Let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth." Those ancient architects sought to establish their own power in order to define their own destiny. Sadly, the Lord was left out of their calculations.
How shallow and vain we are in our worship when we are concerned only for our temporary, physical comfort and well-being. Isaiah "saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple." What do we "see" when we worship the Lord? Do we see the "majesty of His Name?"
In an earlier posting, the use of parallelism by the authors of the Psalms was noted. Psalm 8.1 is another example of that literary device:
"How majestic is your name in all the earth,
Who have displayed Your splendor above the heavens!"
First, let’s look at the two words majestic and splendor. At first sight, we might think these terms are synonymous. Yet, that is not the case. Actually, name and splendor are the synonyms, or, parallel terms.
Majestic has the sense of broadness or loftiness. So, throughout the earth, the name of God can be discerned. What further proof do we need in order to see that "name" implies more than an identifying tag. We know "the name" of God through the revelation of that name in Scripture. We can know about God’s name, his character, by considering the natural world.
Paul stated, "that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made."
Now, God’s love and grace are not expressed or known through the created order. Those are known, in their highest expression, through the Son. As John stated the case, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. . . grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ."
Paul clearly stated that what has been shown to the human race is the "eternal power and divine nature" of God. In other words, the loftiness of God, his wide, unfathomable nature. While school boards and faculty councils debate the relative merits of the theory of evolution over against the theory of intelligent design, Scripture simply affirms that in creation, God has expressed a certain part of his character in order that human beings might place the proper value on themselves. God is the one who is charge, he is the magnificent one. So, this Psalm poses a sobering question. Having considered God’s majesty, David asked, "What is man, that you give him even a thought?"
David and Paul agreed: one need only consider the complex beauty of the natural world to know of God’s existence. Further, one can see, in the vastness of the heavens, more proof of God’s great name. Splendor can mean the light and glory God wears as a king. Thus, the splendor of God which is above the heavens, is visible for those who would see it. His splendor is "above the heavens" not in a spatial way, in the sense of being over or on top of, but in a transcendent way. God’s splendor is of greater significance than the heavens. When one looks at the stars, one sees beauty that points to a greater reality. The sun, moon, planets, stars, and galaxies are merely expressions of the power and divine nature of God.
The Tower of Babel was a testimony to mankind’s over-estimation of himself. In building that edifice of egotistical delight, the people declared, "Let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth." Those ancient architects sought to establish their own power in order to define their own destiny. Sadly, the Lord was left out of their calculations.
How shallow and vain we are in our worship when we are concerned only for our temporary, physical comfort and well-being. Isaiah "saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple." What do we "see" when we worship the Lord? Do we see the "majesty of His Name?"
Thursday, August 03, 2006
Study 15 "How Majestic Is Your Name" Part 2
Psalm 8.1-2
"O LORD, our Lord," is both a declaration of God’s name and an admission of accountability. "You are the Lord, and you are our Lord. You rule all things, and, in particular, you rule over us." So, if the Lord is our ruler, how does that influence our public displays of worship?
We must understand the concept of "name" as that idea is used in Scripture. A name was not simply an identifying tag. A name told a story. When Esau and Jacob were born, Jacob got the name "supplanter." He gained his father’s blessing by "supplanting" his elder brother. Later, Jacob became Israel; he ceased being the supplanter and became the one who contended with God. Instead of gaining a blessing by devious measures, Jacob contended with God until the blessing was his. His unwillingness to let go till the blessing was given was proof of the change in his character. So, he needed a new name. He had shown God he was a changed man, not that he deserved a blessing.
The name of God, YAHWEH, is more than a label. The name is a declaration of God’s character. "God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM;’ and He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’" Jesus declared, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." God declared the infinity of his being; the Son did likewise.
When we say we pray "in Jesus’ name," what do we mean? Are we attaching a magic talisman onto our prayers that compels God to act in a certain way? If we pray "in Jesus’ name," have we determined what God must do? Or, does praying in Jesus’ name signify some other greater truth. How did Jesus pray? "Yet, not as I will, but as You will." So, when we pray "in Jesus’ name," we are praying in a manner appropriate to Jesus’ character: not my will, but yours, O Lord.
Therefore, when we gather in Jesus’ name, we are gathering in such a way as to characterize and honor the very person of Jesus. When the angel announced the birth of Jesus to Joseph, he said, "you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save His people from their sins." The Hebrew name is Yeshua or Joshua or Hosea (all are the same Hebrew name). The word means salvation. So, using Jesus’ name means being aware of his saving from sin.
To gather in Jesus’ name is a declaration by a group of its coming before God in recognition of who Jesus is and what he accomplished on the cross. When the power of Jesus to save from sin is ignored, nothing much is left. If Jesus does not save from sin, then what does he do? Maybe he doesn’t even save. Perhaps, Jesus just makes living prosperously and in health a reality. Thus, Jesus becomes sort of a combination health care and financial investment plan, all rolled into one.
When God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses, one of those commands stated, "You shall not make for yourself an idol." Now, most of the time, we believe if we have not bowed before or offered a sacrifice to a real, honest to goodness idol made of stone, metal, or wood, we have not been idolatrous. Let’s look beyond the physical reality to the spiritual.
What is the purpose of an idol? Basically, to have an idol meant you controlled your God and could manipulate his power. Israel worshiped Baal in order to insure rain for their crops. They did the correct rituals before the "idol," and the god had to respond in an appropriate manner. So, if we hang a nameplate on the door that says Jesus, sing the right songs, raise our hands, give our tithe, and do a few other prescribed rituals, we can force Jesus to "bless" our bodies and our budgets. We’ll be able to live well and feel good about ourselves and our wealth.
Is that what "gathering in his name" means? When Isaiah saw the Lord in the Temple, "high and lifted up," his immediate response was to cry out in despair, "Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts." Only then did Isaiah receive cleansing and a commission.
Do we feel good about ourselves when we gather to worship? How often do we sing the song of praise from Revelation, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain"? Are we afraid to face ourselves when confronted with the holiness of the Living God? Something is wrong with our worship when we come away from the event convinced of our right to wealth and health and healthy self-esteem.
"O LORD, our Lord," is both a declaration of God’s name and an admission of accountability. "You are the Lord, and you are our Lord. You rule all things, and, in particular, you rule over us." So, if the Lord is our ruler, how does that influence our public displays of worship?
We must understand the concept of "name" as that idea is used in Scripture. A name was not simply an identifying tag. A name told a story. When Esau and Jacob were born, Jacob got the name "supplanter." He gained his father’s blessing by "supplanting" his elder brother. Later, Jacob became Israel; he ceased being the supplanter and became the one who contended with God. Instead of gaining a blessing by devious measures, Jacob contended with God until the blessing was his. His unwillingness to let go till the blessing was given was proof of the change in his character. So, he needed a new name. He had shown God he was a changed man, not that he deserved a blessing.
The name of God, YAHWEH, is more than a label. The name is a declaration of God’s character. "God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM;’ and He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’" Jesus declared, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." God declared the infinity of his being; the Son did likewise.
When we say we pray "in Jesus’ name," what do we mean? Are we attaching a magic talisman onto our prayers that compels God to act in a certain way? If we pray "in Jesus’ name," have we determined what God must do? Or, does praying in Jesus’ name signify some other greater truth. How did Jesus pray? "Yet, not as I will, but as You will." So, when we pray "in Jesus’ name," we are praying in a manner appropriate to Jesus’ character: not my will, but yours, O Lord.
Therefore, when we gather in Jesus’ name, we are gathering in such a way as to characterize and honor the very person of Jesus. When the angel announced the birth of Jesus to Joseph, he said, "you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save His people from their sins." The Hebrew name is Yeshua or Joshua or Hosea (all are the same Hebrew name). The word means salvation. So, using Jesus’ name means being aware of his saving from sin.
To gather in Jesus’ name is a declaration by a group of its coming before God in recognition of who Jesus is and what he accomplished on the cross. When the power of Jesus to save from sin is ignored, nothing much is left. If Jesus does not save from sin, then what does he do? Maybe he doesn’t even save. Perhaps, Jesus just makes living prosperously and in health a reality. Thus, Jesus becomes sort of a combination health care and financial investment plan, all rolled into one.
When God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses, one of those commands stated, "You shall not make for yourself an idol." Now, most of the time, we believe if we have not bowed before or offered a sacrifice to a real, honest to goodness idol made of stone, metal, or wood, we have not been idolatrous. Let’s look beyond the physical reality to the spiritual.
What is the purpose of an idol? Basically, to have an idol meant you controlled your God and could manipulate his power. Israel worshiped Baal in order to insure rain for their crops. They did the correct rituals before the "idol," and the god had to respond in an appropriate manner. So, if we hang a nameplate on the door that says Jesus, sing the right songs, raise our hands, give our tithe, and do a few other prescribed rituals, we can force Jesus to "bless" our bodies and our budgets. We’ll be able to live well and feel good about ourselves and our wealth.
Is that what "gathering in his name" means? When Isaiah saw the Lord in the Temple, "high and lifted up," his immediate response was to cry out in despair, "Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts." Only then did Isaiah receive cleansing and a commission.
Do we feel good about ourselves when we gather to worship? How often do we sing the song of praise from Revelation, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain"? Are we afraid to face ourselves when confronted with the holiness of the Living God? Something is wrong with our worship when we come away from the event convinced of our right to wealth and health and healthy self-esteem.
Study 14 "How Majestic Is Your Name" Part 1
Psalm 8.1-2
Have you ever sung the chorus "How Majestic Is Your Name"? "O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth!" What an affirmation! If we want one verse to guide us in our worship theology, Psalm 8.1 is that verse.
An article entitled "Supersized Faith" was featured in the latest edition of NewsMax magazine. Let me note some statements from the piece. "Advocates of the big churches, . . . point out that large churches simply reflect broader trends occurring in society at large. The church, they say, must change with the times." One megachurch pastor’s messages were described as "being less about religion and more about being healthy and prosperous." He was quoted as saying, "I don’t get deep and theological." Sermons "tend to avoid divisive issues and heated oratory about sin." The message is "more upbeat, one of empowerment, and it seems to be working—these churches are packed." "The worship services are high quality, entertaining and well planned." One "authority" was quoted as saying "‘There’s more to spirituality than Scripture, and the megachurches are addressing the full needs of human beings’ while giving them what they want in their everyday lives."
By comparing the quotes from the NewsMax article with the single verse from Psalm 8, we find a real disconnect between modern concepts of worship and the biblical definition. What can be learned from Psalm 8 that would inform our approach to worship?
We begin with the opening word: "LORD." Traditionally, the Jews have been reluctant to pronounce the name of the Lord because of their fear of taking God’s name in vain. So, in reading Scripture, when the Jewish reader arrives at the name of God, YAHWEH, the word Adonai is read instead of YAHWEH. A profound respect guides the Jewish worshiper in his approach to God, even to the point that he will not pronounce the name of God.
Are we in the modern setting as respectful of God? The sense of the NewsMax article was that the worshiper and his "needs" are of paramount concern to the megachurch leadership. But, what about God? What of his expectations from worship?
The NewsMax article closed with a quote from the Gospel of Matthew: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I." This verse begs the question, "What does ‘in my name’ mean?" For many, the name of the Lord is nothing more than an identifying tag, "YAHWEH," "Jesus," "Christ," "El Shaddai," and so forth.
If we hang one of those titles on the door of our building, we must be gathering in that name. Israel labored under such a misconception. They streamed in and out of the Temple and with great fanfare, pomp, and grandeur, worshiped and made offerings to the Lord. Yet, God, speaking through Isaiah stated, "When you come to appear before Me, who requires of you this trampling of My courts?" In other words, is a big crowd in a big building a sign or true worship?
Israel had forgotten that when they came to the Temple, they were gathering in God’s actual presence. For them, "God’s presence" was a spiritual abstraction of sorts. That God was in reality in the Temple had escaped their attention. They came for reasons of self-preservation; their "needs" were of the greatest of importance. Seemingly, only by paying attention to the needs of the worshiper could the worshiper actually worship God. The vision of Isaiah in Isa. 6 showed how misguided such worship was. God was indeed in the Temple, and Israel had missed that most important point. His presence was the chief reality; everything else should have flowed from that truth.
"O LORD, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth." So, when we declare we are gathered in the "name of the Lord," what do we mean? And, when we declare that we are gathered in his name, is the Lord required to show up? Further, does being "gathered in his name" mean that everything we do is acceptable to him?
Paul made an insightful comment to the church in Rome. "For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man." When the worshiper replaces God as the focus of worship, we have entered the realm of idolatry.
Have you ever sung the chorus "How Majestic Is Your Name"? "O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth!" What an affirmation! If we want one verse to guide us in our worship theology, Psalm 8.1 is that verse.
An article entitled "Supersized Faith" was featured in the latest edition of NewsMax magazine. Let me note some statements from the piece. "Advocates of the big churches, . . . point out that large churches simply reflect broader trends occurring in society at large. The church, they say, must change with the times." One megachurch pastor’s messages were described as "being less about religion and more about being healthy and prosperous." He was quoted as saying, "I don’t get deep and theological." Sermons "tend to avoid divisive issues and heated oratory about sin." The message is "more upbeat, one of empowerment, and it seems to be working—these churches are packed." "The worship services are high quality, entertaining and well planned." One "authority" was quoted as saying "‘There’s more to spirituality than Scripture, and the megachurches are addressing the full needs of human beings’ while giving them what they want in their everyday lives."
By comparing the quotes from the NewsMax article with the single verse from Psalm 8, we find a real disconnect between modern concepts of worship and the biblical definition. What can be learned from Psalm 8 that would inform our approach to worship?
We begin with the opening word: "LORD." Traditionally, the Jews have been reluctant to pronounce the name of the Lord because of their fear of taking God’s name in vain. So, in reading Scripture, when the Jewish reader arrives at the name of God, YAHWEH, the word Adonai is read instead of YAHWEH. A profound respect guides the Jewish worshiper in his approach to God, even to the point that he will not pronounce the name of God.
Are we in the modern setting as respectful of God? The sense of the NewsMax article was that the worshiper and his "needs" are of paramount concern to the megachurch leadership. But, what about God? What of his expectations from worship?
The NewsMax article closed with a quote from the Gospel of Matthew: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I." This verse begs the question, "What does ‘in my name’ mean?" For many, the name of the Lord is nothing more than an identifying tag, "YAHWEH," "Jesus," "Christ," "El Shaddai," and so forth.
If we hang one of those titles on the door of our building, we must be gathering in that name. Israel labored under such a misconception. They streamed in and out of the Temple and with great fanfare, pomp, and grandeur, worshiped and made offerings to the Lord. Yet, God, speaking through Isaiah stated, "When you come to appear before Me, who requires of you this trampling of My courts?" In other words, is a big crowd in a big building a sign or true worship?
Israel had forgotten that when they came to the Temple, they were gathering in God’s actual presence. For them, "God’s presence" was a spiritual abstraction of sorts. That God was in reality in the Temple had escaped their attention. They came for reasons of self-preservation; their "needs" were of the greatest of importance. Seemingly, only by paying attention to the needs of the worshiper could the worshiper actually worship God. The vision of Isaiah in Isa. 6 showed how misguided such worship was. God was indeed in the Temple, and Israel had missed that most important point. His presence was the chief reality; everything else should have flowed from that truth.
"O LORD, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth." So, when we declare we are gathered in the "name of the Lord," what do we mean? And, when we declare that we are gathered in his name, is the Lord required to show up? Further, does being "gathered in his name" mean that everything we do is acceptable to him?
Paul made an insightful comment to the church in Rome. "For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man." When the worshiper replaces God as the focus of worship, we have entered the realm of idolatry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)