Gadfly's Muse

All We, Like Weeds, Have Gone Astray.....

[MorningWeeds, 2008, JAVanDevender]

God's Church has more in common with a field of weeds, I think, than a grape vine trained on a trellis.

It appears to me that the sprouting is much more haphazard and spontaneous ( at least from a human perspective) than orderly and consistent.  This is not, may God forbid, to criticize the work of the Holy Spirit.  It is His Church and He does what is best.  But if Revelations 2 & 3 have anything to teach us, a plethora of churches, having wildly divergent orientations, is not always desirable.

First off, I believe that denominationalism is a good thing and that, within certain limits, it is necessary to have diversity within the broader church.  I believe that there is not only room but blessing in the fact that different communions have different emphases within them.  We need to challenge each other with our views of worship, with how the sacraments are to be understood and practiced, with what constitutes preaching, with how a scriptural ethic plays itself out in everyday discourse, etc. etc.  Apart from this dialog flowing from sincere differences in perspective, the Church grows moribund and sterile... I think.

However, that divergence which is present and which reflects fundamentally different orientations toward Scripture,  is not desirable and is deadly.  The "weeds" in the field, often the ones bearing the most seeds, are often those who have departed from Scriptural authority... who understand the Scriptures as functioning, if at all, within a narrow band of spirituality which allows for most of the church's life to be governed by pragmatism,  bureaucratic formalism, or even worse - impulsive innovationism.  The desire to be "exciting" and "relevant" often means bending Scripture to our will or even ignoring it - making excuses for the parts that don't quite fit with what we think modern minds want to hear.  That divergence which concerns me most is that which is growing out of a sense that Scripture is not God's Word for today... that it does not regulate the Church today... that it only gives us the history of what God has done, how He did it, and very little about how what He did and how He did it has any bearing on "now."  There are those who clearly espouse this idea.  There are those who practically espouse it though giving lip service to a different view.  There are those who go beyond this.  The bottom line... God's field is overgrown with weeds... and the rising sun reveals them glistening in its light.

It's about time for something to be done about this situation and Christians ought to be a bit apprehensive about what God may decide that to be. At the very least we ought to be heeding the Spirit's call to return to Christ as Head of the Church and discover in Scripture His voice calling us back to a more consistent, more unified voice and witness, even within our diversity.  I am convinced that such is not only possible but is, in fact, God's intention for us.  We need to repent and return to the Word of God, both Ruling and Inscripturated.  We need to make His Word central in our lives, our worship and the governance of our churches.

It seems so simple and so plain.  Why is it so hard?

A Bridge To Nowhere ....

(Board Bridge, 2008, JAVanDevender)

Has a nation changed its gods,which are not gods?  But My people have changed their Glory for what does not profit. Jer. 2:11

“Wicca is the fastest-growing religion in America, set to be the third largest religion by 2012,” .....While “Harry Potter” and other media like “Charmed,” “Buffy,” “Sabrina,” and “The Craft” have skyrocketed witchcraft into the public eye,... among the biggest draws to the Wiccan culture is how community-oriented it is. ....“Many involved in Wicca come from lonely backgrounds or difficult relationships and find new friends in the Wiccan community who embrace them (sometimes better than Christians do),”....“As our culture becomes more and more isolated and busy (and as real relationships are replaced by texting, IM, etc.), young people are starving for real relationships and true community, as well as for a powerful experience of faith." ....“People want a supernatural experience. ..."

(QUOTES TAKEN FROM HERE)

The growth of Wicca is not the fundamental problem.  The primary issue is man's inherent desire for a spirituality that is essentially divorced from obedience. 

As Jeremiah noted in the passage quoted above, people have been more than willing to trade worship of the one true God for the worship of that which is no god at all, for centuries.  What is the appeal?  It comes at various levels but all of it is rooted in a fundamental self-centeredness.  Idols are simple to understand.  They make certain demands, all of which are within the external ability of human beings to meet.  Some of these demands may be extraordinarily stringent - like sacrificing a human life to the god of a volcano - but they are within the ordinary external capacity of human beings to meet.  Once that external requirement is met, the god of the idol simply lets us alone.  He or she or it is satisfied and now we can get on with our life as we want. 

Thus idolatry is human centered, not god centered.  Man is in control.

Now, if, as is the case with Wicca, the idol worship promises and includes a fairly extensive "spiritual" benefit... if there are plenty of "wooo-wooo" minutes, spine tingling warm and fuzzies, and stuff, then so much the better.  As was the case in the Roman empire with the onslaught of the Mystery Religions, the appeal becomes widespread and pervasive.  People flock to these religions even though, as the title expresses, they are bridges to nowhere.  There is no "god" on the other side... the religious experience, the spirituality, is sterile because, like the sexual act, it is nothing more than an experience when divorced from truth.

This is far different and inferior to the God of Christianity, to Jesus Christ.  The reality is that man is not in control in the relation with the Deity.  When we have done all that we can we are still unfruitful servants.  Far from being satisfied with some paltry religious observance, the God who created the heavens and the earth demands our whole being - lock, stock and barrel.  This is a scary thought, but that is what one encounters when he is on a bridge to somewhere.  Wicca, like other false "spiritual" religions, focuses our eyes on the journey, on the crossing of the bridge.  It poses no threat because there is no-One on the other side to whom we must give account.  It's appeal lies in this basic deception. 

This is not to make light of the dreadfully accurate criticisms of the Christian community contained in the quote above.  Christians, of all the worlds peoples, ought to be the ones who are demonstrating true community, vibrant spiritual experience and a celebration of truth.  There ought not be any real appeal to such falsehoods as Wicca when the manifest light of Jesus Christ is present.  But our lamps have not been on the lamp stand, they have been hidden under a basket and so people line up to take the various bridges to nowhere that are so appealingly advertised.

We need to learn again what it means to love God and love our neighbor.  We need to point people toward the bridge to somewhere - the cross of Jesus of Nazareth and the risen Christ who is Lord.  We need to show that this God is not satisfied with paltry external offerings, He accepts nothing less than the willing sacrifice of our entire life - heart, mind and body - which is our reasonable service.  And then, we need to demonstrate, in no uncertain terms, that in taking up our cross and following Him, that we gain our life, that we discover true joy and that the peace which transcends all understanding permeates all that we do. 

That is the truth of what is possible.  We have a bridge to somewhere... that means we have something to offer to those on the other one.

It's a Scary Thing: Security Vs. Freedom - Reflections on Wall Street & Other Stuff

(Dave's Eagle, 2008, Dave Johanson)

I've commented on Jacque Ellul's The Subversion of Christianity before (see August 29, 2008).  Ellul is always provocative even when infuriating.  I suppose that is why I like reading him so much.

His comments on how the human yearning for security serves to undermine the Gospel and to strip Christians of the freedom their Savior purchased at terrible cost, is well worth reading.  Christians ARE too easily influenced by cultural values and are always looking over their shoulder at the land of Egypt where they had  "fish which (to eat)freely, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic" (Numbers 11:1-5).  They forget the iron bonds of slavery that went along with that security.  Christians have been set free to trust God.  Trusting God is scary business because freedom is scary.  It means being totally at risk for our own decisions.  It means living without a safety net before a God who is a consuming fire.  However, it also means being completely free of the constraints of men, serving God first and men second, but apart from ANY subjection to preconceived notions of how that must be done.

A Christian abides by the law in freedom from the law.  Until that radical notion is at least partially grasped and embraced, a life built on grace, bounded by grace, rooted in grace and bearing fruit in grace is not really possible.  Radical freedom is a scary thing...

The desire to trade freedom for security is the basic impetus moving in the current crisis on wall street.  Pseudo-smart people with more money than wisdom aspired to a perpetual-motion machine of unending prosperity.  They believed that with their computer controlled manipulation they could have security and prosperity apart from the law of pride (it goes before a fall... that one).  Now the demand is for a safety net, for the sacrifice of freedom so that comfort may endure.  Woe to you... hypocrites.

The book of Judges eloquently proclaims the cyclical nature of human events. It preaches that an intervening and ruling God will take steps to chasten those who ignore His word and claims.  The United States has never been a "Christian Nation" in the formal sense of the term but the bed rock culture that grounded it in liberty was.  The notions of freedom that lead to this grand experiment encompassed and enfolded the accompanying notions of responsibility, where each man stood naked before God and totally responsible for what he did, said or thought.  "Getting your just deserts" is an inevitable corollary to the freedom to pursue happiness, or so we once thought. 

What our economy is on the verge of receiving is a sound "whacking" by a chastening God who will not reward greed.  We need to relearn that lesson and it is not in the long term best interests of Christians  or anyone else in this country to try to buy our way out of that chastening.  I imagine it will only prolong the inevitable and ultimately make it worse.

Charlie Wilson's Sordid Little War.....

"That's when I fell in love with America!"

With those words the overall moral of this tale is supposed to be set.  This is to be understood as a story about how the virtue of patriotism, love for country, is the sanctifying grace which covers a multitude of sins.  The point is to convince us, that in the face of great overall objectives, such as the defeat of the evil empire, the vindication of an oppressed people, and the gallant empowerment of an underdog, the means by which these things are pursued are of secondary importance or perhaps, even rendered irrelevant.

After watching this movie I also watched a History Channel documentary which detailed the same story only adding even more details.  We might be tempted to understand the movie as playing up the sex, nudity, bribery, solicitation, influence peddling, etc. etc. etc. as Hollywood sensationalism.  Unfortunately, after watching the documentary, the movie is not only accurate in its broad outlines, it fails to portray the fullness of the depravity.

This story is not about American values - it is about waging war against an enemy - in this case the Soviet Union.  It is about winning at whatever the cost.  If it means that an expensive junket to Paris, pulling out all the stops so as to influence an important Congressman who controls the budget, is needed prior to taking him to Pakistan for the political coup de grace, then fire up the engines and let's go.  The fact that this is what is needed to sway a man of importance in matters of ultimate national interest, is appalling, yet here we see that it is accepted as just the way things are done.  Is there sober consideration of national strategy, a long term moral vision, a considered plan?   Absolutely not.  Incredibly important decisions are made viscerally, sometimes in a drunken haze. 

Is there a weapon cache available in Egypt that can be used to furnish the Afghan rebels with the means to stop the Russian juggernaut?  Well, yes there is.  How can we convince them to release it?  Well, of course, take a Texas belly dancer to Egypt and let her seduce the man who controls the inventory.  Here is Charlie Wilson as pimp.

In a drunken  haze Wilson rear ends a car on the 14th street bridge in Washington, D. C.  But he is sober enough to flee the scene of the accident.  We are assured that his integrity is such that if anyone had been seriously injured he would have stayed.  But, the needs of the nation must come first and therefore he makes a few phone calls, arranges a pay off, and is off to France.  Shades of Chappaquiddick! 

Somehow we are supposed to chuckle and say, well, "boys will be boys."  Somehow we are supposed to believe that people in high places are to be given special dispensation for moral integrity. 

If there was even a hint of idealism, of principled decision making, present in this story, then I could probably go along with the basic premise.  Then I could say that Charlie Wilson was a scoundrel with a conscience.  However, in neither the movie or the documentary is such the case.  Charlie Wilson is a competitor.  He is out to win and winning is all that matters.  In this case the true goal of supporting the Afghans was to be "killing Russians". Why?  Because they are our enemy and we hate them.  There is respect for the Afghans but the movie and the documentary keeps coming back to the basic attitude - "They are fighting our war!  Why should we not support them?"  There is no long term strategy.  There is no idea of what type of government ought to be present in Afghanistan.  There are no visions of freedom or institutions of justice that are worth the cost of fighting, as there was in the American Revolution.  There is only the goal of defeating the Soviet Union. 

So, when the war is over, American arms are proven superior to the Soviet's, the Russian Bear has been humiliated, Viet Nam has been avenged, and the Americans leave the Afghans to their own devices. 

There is not much here to be proud of other than Ronald Reagan's courage in deciding to release Stinger missiles to the resistance fighters.  Other than that, we are left with what is the reality of the situation.  Our political institutions are completely dominated by men and women of no vision, principle or fundamental values. 

I am not so blind as to think that this is entirely new.  Ben Franklin's moral life and diplomatic skills were identical to that of Charlie Wilson.  The difference between now and then is that there does not seem to be any balancing weights.  The difference is that Ben Franklin was primarily a secondary figure, of limited long-term impact, a dwarf among giants.  Today, it appears that the dwarves are not only ascendant , they are admired and celebrated.

Isaiah has some words to say about this kind of thing.  Perhaps we would be wise to listen to him.

Isaiah 5:20-24   20 Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!  21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, And prudent in their own sight!  22 Woe to men mighty at drinking wine, Woe to men valiant for mixing intoxicating drink,  23 Who justify the wicked for a bribe, And take away justice from the righteous man!  24 Therefore, as the fire devours the stubble, And the flame consumes the chaff, So their root will be as rottenness, And their blossom will ascend like dust; Because they have rejected the law of the LORD of hosts, And despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.

Attitude & Opinion

(click for better image)

Marilynne Robinson, whom I've quoted before, hits the nail on the head in her observations even if I disagree with her politics (she is a classical liberal).

Here's what she says on pge. 262 in The Death Of Adam

The present dominance of aspersion and ridicule in American public life is a reflex of the fact that we are assumed to want, and in many cases perhaps do want, attitude much more than information.

I suppose each one of us could, upon an instant, call to mind four or five people whose entire demeanor and conversation correspond to Robinson's insight.  I suppose, with some reflection, we might see ourselves there more than we ought. 

There is more to it than simple ignorance.  If it were only ignorance I suppose, with suitable public relations and the inevitable pressures of making a living, the situation would, in a sense, be self-correcting.  Would that it was that simple but it is not.  If this is ignorance, it is willful ignorance and to my knowledge there is no known cure for that disease.

A Darwinian Nightmare

(This is a re-pub from a couple of years ago)

Originally they were intended to establish the first dependent colony in the new  frontier of Mars.  There was not much which would have recommended their sophisticated and complex ship to the original Conestoga wagons, but the concept was the same.  Go to Mars, carve out the first steps of an envisioned future space port, a way point for further galactic or even inter-galactic travel.  Settle down, have children, become the space-age equivalent of the Mayflower.  Even the title of their mission, Plymouth Venture, pointed back to those nearly forgotten years when the promise of a new land, new beginnings and the opportunity to be involved in a dream of enormous potential claimed the imaginations of so many.

Reflections: Virginia Tech & The Culture of Violence

Matthew 5:22  "But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.

The shrill voices are already at work.  "Ban gun sales!", "Tighten security!", "Psychological profiling!".  As the nation grieves, recoils and with a morbid voyeurism stares endlessly at our TV sets; as we  listen to more mindless drivel rehearsing the same story in breathless and subdued voices; nothing approaching sober analysis comes through.  We are a nation who reacts, we rear our heads in passion and clutch at straws with our hands, but the passion passes and we ease back into the tepid waters that surround us, oblivious to the very currents in the stream which kill our soul and make such events as happened this week probable.

The most grievous lesson that we should learn from the massacre at Virigina Tech is: it takes something like this to shock us!

Thought For Today

“What it comes to is that your conception of human nature may be not merely wrong, but impolite. If you think God or nature had a purpose in making two sexes, so that sodomy isn’t quite on a par with making babies, please—keep it to yourself! In Washington, sodomy isn’t disapproved; but the word sodomy is, and you can damage your career by using it in public. You are expected to let on that you’d be horrified to learn that your son smokes Camels, but proud to learn that he’s gay. Would these be the reactions of any parent you know? What hypocrisy! But such is sophistication. We display our refinement by pretending not to have natural feelings. In the space of a few years, the tradition of millennia is repudiated. What’s more, the repudiation is mandatory for everyone. You might think that a liberal, tolerant society would leave a little room for what, until recently, everyone assumed, but no!—no trace of the old attitude is permitted. The one thing liberalism has ‘zero tolerance’ for is the past. We live in a pluralistic society now, where everyone must think and talk alike, in keeping with the latest federal diversity guidelines. Needless to say, there is precious little diversity about all this.” —Joseph Sobran

Quoted in http://archive.patriotpost.us/pub/07-15_Brief/page-2.php

The Limits of Reason

Proverbs 4:23   Keep your heart with all diligence, For out of it spring the issues of life.

Perhaps no fallacy is so widespread as that which identifies man as an essentially rational animal, who guides himself by reason and whose choices in life are disciplined by logic. 

I grant that some individuals come closer to this standard than others, but those that do are generally viewed with suspicion if not down right distaste by their neighbors.  Where individuals are most often able to order things according to a strict rationalism is when the sphere of action is confined within the limits of disinterest; when it doesn't affect that individual 's core of existence, whether lifestyle, personal consideration, or other such elemental issues.

When it comes to the core, more often than not, and as a general description of humanity, it is not the rational mind that rules, but rather as Proverbs says - it is the heart.

Art as "Craft"

Thanks to Jeremiah H. for a great link - "Good Art"

Paul Graham proposes an interesting subject "How Art Can Be Good" and then goes on to discuss the issues of subjectivity, taste, various audience's receptivity, cultural inclinations, etc.  He relays a very interesting anecdote about his own art training, when a professor was asked the embarrassing question "Why don't we (modern artists) paint like that (17th century artists) any more?"  The elephant in the room at the time was the undeniable fact that modern art (on the whole) doesn't hold a candle to the quality of artistic endeavor manifestly present in earlier times.  Graham goes on to speculate that there are reasons for this condition.  He thinks that the concept of "good art" as opposed  to "bad art" meant something then and provided an impetus for artists to excell.