Influence: Like Father, Like Son

 

Influence is greater than numbers. The question is not, "How big is your church?" The real question is, "How is your church's influence?"

You could be twelve people, and salt the world with the good news of the Kingdom. You could be twelve hundred, and be an audience inside a saltshaker.

How is your influence going? Which way is it going? Because of you, are people better, or worse?

Every father influences his children, for worse, or for better. My father influenced me for better. 

I remember seeing dad read his Bible, usually in the evening before he went to bed. Dad read his Bible so much that his thumb wore through the leather cover. I have it now. Here it is.

I received my own leather-covered Bible when I was confirmed in our Lutheran Church. I was twelve years old. My mother put my Bible somewhere - I didn't know where and I did not care. I never picked it up and read it.

Until I was 21. That's when Jesus rescued me out of a deep enslavement to evil. My life began to change for the better! And, I needed a Bible.

I drove to my parents' home. I asked, "Mom, do you know where my Bible is?"

She got it for me. I began to read. And read. I wore the leather out on it so much that the cover finally broke off. I still have this Bible. Here it is.

Like father, like son, right?

As the apostle Paul wrote:

Follow my example,

as I follow the example of Christ.

1 Cor. 11:1

And,

Join together in following my example, brothers and sisters,

and just as you have us as a model,

keep your eyes on those who live as we do.

Philippians 3:17

"The Sheep and the Goats" (Sermon, at Redeemer, 6/19/22)

Divine Anger

              (A few weeks ago Linda and  were in New York City.)

This morning at Redeemer I preached on Matthew 25:31-46. Part of my sermon focused on matters of judgment, the wrath of God, and eternal separation from God.

These are topics liberal and progressive Christians don't believe in. For liberals' dsmisal judgment, see theologian Roger Olson's recent Against Liberal Theology: Putting the Brakes on Progressive Christianity, For progressivist waffling on judgment, see my Deconstructing Progressive Christianity (chapter 14 - "Love and Wrath").

To hold to a theology that demythologizes judgment and God's wrath is to hold to a religion that has become unhinged from historic, orthodox Christianity. See, e.g., these words of Jesus I preached on today.

31 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the [a]holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats... Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

The concepts ensconced here permeate the Olivet Discourse of Jesus. Demythologize it, and what you have is a different religion, made in your own image. It's an understatement to say that such a Marcionite move disinterests me.

God's love and expressions of his wrath do not involve us in contradictions. For example, this morning I shared how the recent child-killings at the school in Texas made me sad, and angry. It did the same to you, correct? What kind of person would not feel wrath towards such a heinous act? And, wrathful emotions do not imply that one lacks love. Indeed, such wrath against unrighteousness is an expression of love.

For more on how God's love is sometimes expressed in God's wrath, see Kevin Kinghorn, But What About God's Wrath? The Compelling Love Story of God's Anger. 

See my sermon on "The Sheep and the Goats," HERE. 

Check out this quote from Yale theologian Miroslav Volf.

  

God Is Wrathful Because God Is Love

 

                                                                   (Monroe County)

Yale theologian Miroslav Volf personally witnessed the horrors of the Bosnian war. Out of this context he wrote,

I used to think that wrath was unworthy of God. Isn’t God love? Shouldn’t divine love be beyond wrath? God is love, and God loves every person and every creature. That’s exactly why God is wrathful against some of them. My last resistance to the idea of God’s wrath was a casualty of the war in former Yugoslavia, the region from which I come. According to some estimates, 200,000 people were killed and over 3,000,000 were displaced. My villages and cities were destroyed, my people shelled day in and day out, some of them brutalized beyond imagination, and I could not imagine God not being angry. Or think of Rwanda in the last decade of the past century, where 800,000 people were hacked to death in one hundred days!

​How did God react to the carnage? By doting on the perpetrators in a grandparently fashion? By refusing to condemn the bloodbath but instead affirming the perpetrators basic goodness? Wasn’t God fiercely angry with them? Though I used to complain about the indecency of the idea of God’s wrath, I came to think that I would have to rebel against a God who wasn’t wrathful at the sight of the world’s evil. God isn’t wrathful in spite of being love. God is wrathful because God is love.

 Volf, Free of Charge: Giving and Forgiving in a Culture Stripped of Grace, (Zondervan 2005) pp. 138-139

Knowing Things Is Not the Same Thing as Understanding Them

 

                 (One of Linda's plants, in our front yard.)

Is the internet making people experts? Even geniuses?

No. To understand why, read Tom Nichols' The Death of Expertise. It's both brilliant and troubling, hilarious and scary. I'm re-reading it, so as to better understand it.

Nichols writes:

"Knowing things is not the same as understanding them. Comprehension is not the same thing as analysis. Expertise is not a parlor game played with factoids."

You might be able to find a few factoids on my wife Linda. But this doesn't mean you understand her. We've been married for 47 years, and have spent much of that time growing in our understanding of one another. To understand someone takes time. And, that time must be spent in a certain way. Deep understanding of almost anything is a slow cooker.

My personal physician tells me to resist diagnosing myself on the internet. Yes, I can cite a few factoids with maybe a little understanding here and there. But he has treated actual patients for decades. I have not. Therefore, he understands much that I never will.

Merely citing facts does not equal understanding.

I taught critical thinking (logic) for 18 years at our county community college. Probably, you haven't. So maybe, just maybe, I comprehend things in this area that you do not.

And, of course, you comprehend things in areas I am unfamiliar with. I have friends who have been in the homebuilding profession for years. I have not. Therefore, they have wisdom that I could not acquire by internet self-education.

Nichols's dangerous idea is that people see themselves as knowledgeable as experts. Often, this has horrific outcomes. He writes:

"While there are self-trained experts, they are rare exceptions. More common are the people seeking quick entry into complicated fields but who have no idea how poor their efforts are. They are like the moderately entertaining karaoke singers who think they have a chance to become the next winner of American Idol, or the scratch golfers who think they might take a shot at going pro. Doing something well is not the same thing as becoming a trusted source of advice or learning about a subject." (P. 37)

 

DECLARATIONS of HOPE (adapted from Steve Backlund)

• Today is the day that God is going to show off His favor on me.
• I speak to any worry, stress, or anxiety, and I say you cannot stay. Peace reigns in this temple.
• There is nothing I am facing that Scripture cannot speak into.
• I am not who my past experience says I am; I am who God says I am.
• Today is the day of my breakthrough — I am free!
• Because I trust in God, I am kept in perfect peace.
• My hope, my finances, my strategies, and my partnerships with others are causing great positive change in lives and nations.
• Tomorrow is going to be one of the best days of my life.
• I will wake up with strong faith, strong love, and strong hope in my heart.
• My past prayers will be working mightily today in every situation that concerns me.
• As I attach faith to what I am hearing, He will do far more than I could ever hope or imagine.

The Bwa-Ha-Ha Argument

Occasionally, someone attacks something I say, using what I call the Bwa-ha-ha argument. It happened recently, in response to my chapter on marriage in my book Deconstructing Progressive Christianity. (It is probable that the attacker has not actually read my book.)

The Bwa-ha-ha argument provides evidence of possible cognitive incapacity. A possible inability to think critically. Or, it is revelatory of someone swimming uncritically in the sea of their social imaginary. This means Bwa-ha-ha-ing someone is a hierarchical, oppressive power move.

I had fun in my MCCC Logic classes when I taught on informal logical fallacies; especially: 

1) fallacies of irrelevant premises; 

2) fallacies with unacceptable premises; and 

3) persuaders (rhetorical moves).

I really liked teaching this section. The text I used was excellent on, e.g., my favorite all-time informal logical fallacy: the genetic fallacy. What a cool failure of reasoning! What a great example of ill-logic (yes, two 'l's).

Ad hominem fallacies abound on the internet. Facebook is a breeding ground for them; log in and watch them multiply like bunnies. Ad hominem arguments have irrelevant premises. So, I present to you the irrational, but emotionally appealing, Bwa-ha-ha argument. 

1. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-haaaaaaa!
2. !!!!!!!!!!!!!
3. Therefore, (Belief X) is stupid. (More bwa-ha-ha-ha-ing...)

When exposed, my class seemed to enjoy this form of irrationality. Premises 1 and 2 are irrelevant to the truth of Belief X (whatever X signifies). Hopefully my students understood this part!

(For an example of an atheist who stands with me on this, see Steven Pinker's Rationality: What It Is. Why It Seems Scarce. Why It Matters.) 

Orthodox Christianity and Liberal Christianity: The Difference Between the Two

 

                                       (New York City, from our hotel room)

I'm enjoying Roger Olson's new book Against Liberal Theology: Putting the Brakes on Progressive Christianity. 

Here's Olson quoting liberal (and process) theologian Delwin Brown, on the difference between liberal and orthodox Christianity.

"I have never read or heard the basic difference between orthodox Christianity and liberal Christianity expressed more clearly and concisely than by liberal theologian Delwin Brown, whom I quoted in the introduction. According to Brown, the main difference between orthodox Christianity and liberal Christianity has to do with different authorities for belief. Liberal Christianity’s main authority for belief is “the modern consensus,” by which Brown means contemporary “reason, sensory experience, intuition, . . . praxis,” and not the Bible. He wrote, “To summarize my view, the Bible is not the criterion of truth. . . . The Bible does not ‘norm’ us, it does form us.” Clark Pinnock, an orthodox Christian theologian, responded that the main problem with liberal theology is “its apparent willingness to break with the foundational proclamation. . . . It leaves the way open to reduce and distort the Word of God under the pressure of modern ideas.” Brown responded to Pinnock’s orthodox defense of the Bible as Christianity’s supreme source and norm for belief by saying, “I do not think anyone should ever believe anything simply because it is in the Bible.”"

(Olson, p. 36)

Now Reading...

 

                                              (Last week Linda and I were in New York City.)

I've read theologian Roger Olson's books, over the years, and find him engaging, helpful, and fair. Olson is emeritus professor of theology at Baylor University.

I've just started his new book Against Liberal Theology: Putting the Brakes on Progressive Christianity.

Here are a few reviews.

'Roger Olson's Against Liberal Theology is a courageous and calm definition, examination, and evaluation of the collapse of authentic, orthodox Christian theology in the minds, hearts, and hands of one liberal (not progressive) theologian after another. In their own words, Olson often shines a bright, piercing light on their own criticisms. This is a vintage example of Olson being Olson: he knows the literature, he is candid, he is fair, and he is unstinting in criticism of the pitfalls of liberal theologians. And he examines only those who overtly espouse 'liberal' in their theology. Those most attracted into progressivism and then into liberalism will benefit from a humble reading of this book.' -- Scot McKnight, professor of New Testament, Northern Seminary

'Roger Olson shows us the absolute theological vacuity of American liberal Christianity. He demonstrates that liberalism's God is a mirror of themselves, their Jesus is not worthy of worship nor a savior of any sort, and the Holy Spirit is merely a symbol for their own musings. Olson's verdict is damning but indubitable: liberal Christianity has little to do with classic or historical Christianity.' -- Michael Bird, academic dean and lecturer in New Testament, Ridley College --This text refers to the paperback edition.

Love - Some of My "Hermeneutics of Love" Posts

                                                 (Linda and I were in New York City this past weekend.)

(See especially chapter 14, "Love and Wrath," in my book Deconstructing Progressive Christianity.)

(One of the best book I've read on love is Lewis Smedes' Love Within Limits: Realzing Selfless Love in a Selfless World.)

The Love of Jesus Is Different

Love Has No "If"

Love Always Protects

Love Does Not Affirm Sin

Love Is Not Jealous

Love Requires a Predicate

Love Goes Beyond What People Can Hear

Love and Prayer

Love Does Not Mock Others

Real Love is Nonpossessive (Escaping the Tyranny of Self-Rejection)

God's Solution to Our Love Problem Is Not Marriage, But Himself

Love is Kind

Being Loved by God Frees Us to Love Others

Love Is What God Is

Love Is Produced in You As You Abide in Jesus

Love Is Not an Entity to Be Worshiped

Love Is Not the Greatest

To Love Is Not to Agree

LOVE IN AN AGE OF OUTRAGE VIDEO

Where God's Love Is, Self-Hatred Is Not

Distinguishing Between Love and Desire