'If God were good, He would wish to make His creatures perfectly happy, and if God were almighty He would be able to do what He wished. But the creatures are not happy. Therefore God lacks either goodness, or power, or both.' This is the problem of pain, in its simplest form...
His Omnipotence means power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense. This is no limit to His power. If you choose to say 'God can give a creature free will and at the same time withhold free will from it', you have not succeeded in saying anything about God: meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prefix to them the two other words 'God can'.
It remains true that all things are possible with God: the intrinsic impossibilities are not things but nonentities. It is no more possible for God than for the weakest of His creatures to carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives; not because His power meets an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.
- C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain
if God is omnibenevolent (all-good), omniscient (all-knowing) and omnipotent (all-powerful), then why doesn't He create a world in which there is no sin, strife and suffering?
in the first place, this is not a valid objection to the existence of God. if you blame God for creating a world in which there is sin, strife and suffering, then you have to grant that He exists. if you don't grant that He exists, then you cannot blame Him for creating a world in which there is sin, strife and suffering.
but moving on - the more i think about it, the more i think Leibniz's solution to the problem of evil is philosophically and theologically sound. in short, God does not create a better world because there isn't one.
a1. only God is uncreated.
a2. the world is not uncreated.
a3. therefore, the world is not like God.
b1. only God is perfect.
b2. the world is not like God.
b3. therefore, the world is not perfect.
in other words,
c1. if the world is perfect, then it would be like God.
c2. if the world is like God, then it would be uncreated.
c3. the world is not uncreated.
c4. therefore, the world is not like God.
c5. therefore, the world is not perfect.
Saturday 28 February 2009
Friday 27 February 2009
rethinking the parable of the talents
"Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his property to them. To one he gave five talents of money, to another two talents, and to another one talent, each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey." - Matthew 25:14-15 (NIV)
last sunday evening's sermon at york baptist church got me rethinking the parable of the talents. in the parable of the talents, the man going on a journey represents Jesus and his servants represent us. what about the talents? what do they represent?
i used to think that the talents represent our abilities. however, the parable of the talents says that the man entrusted his talents to his servants, each according to his ability. the talents do not represent our abilities but our ministries. of course, both our abilities and our ministries are from God and for God.
God would never give us certain abilities without also calling us to corresponding ministries. at the same time, God would never call us to certain ministries without also giving us corresponding abilities. for example, God would never give someone the gift of teaching without also calling him to be a teacher. at the same time, God would never call someone to be a teacher without also giving him the gift of teaching.
"Now finish the work, so that your eager willingness to do it may be matched by your completion of it, according to your means. For if the willingness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has, not according to what he does not have." - 2 Corinthians 8:11-12 (NIV)
in the parable of the talents, the servants were judged on what they did with what they had, not on what they did not do with what they did not have. the servant who was entrusted with two talents was judged on what he did with the two talents which he was entrusted with, not on what he did not do with the five talents which he was not entrusted with.
at the end of the day, we should 'use whatever gift [we have] received to serve others, faithfully administering God's grace in its various forms' (1 Peter 4:10, NIV). we should seek to do what God has called us to do and resist what God has not called us to do, not resist what God has called us to do or seek to do what God has not called us to do.
"For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him." - Matthew 25:29 (NIV)
"From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." - Luke 12:48 (NIV)
*****
there is a huge difference between the concept of justification by works and the concept of salvation by works. the concept of justification by works implies that God judges us on what we do with what we have (not what we do not do with what we do not have), while the concept of salvation by works implies that God counts us righteous in our works (instead of in Christ's work on the cross). the concept of justification by works is biblical, while the concept of salvation by works is unbiblical. as N.T. Wright points out, 'some Christians have used terms like 'justification' and 'salvation' as though they were almost interchangeable, but this is clearly untrue to Scripture itself'.
[Scripture does not teach salvation by works (even as it teaches justification by works). for that matter, Scripture does not teach salvation by faith (even as it teaches justification by faith). rather, Scripture teaches salvation by grace through faith.
this is not just semantics! there is a huge difference between the concept of salvation by grace through faith and the concept of salvation by faith. the concept of salvation by grace through faith implies that salvation is unconditionally given by God by grace and conditionally received by man through faith, while the concept of salvation by faith implies that salvation is conditionally given by God based on man's faith. the concept of salvation by grace through faith is biblical, while the concept of salvation by faith is unbiblical.]
if you equate the concept of justification by works to the concept of salvation by works, then of course the concept of justification by works is unbiblical - because the concept of salvation by works is unbiblical. but if you recognise that there is a huge difference between the concept of justification by works and the concept of salvation by works, then suddenly the concept of justification by works isn't unbiblical after all.
"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." - Ephesians 2:8-10 (NIV)
"You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." - James 2:24 (NIV)
last sunday evening's sermon at york baptist church got me rethinking the parable of the talents. in the parable of the talents, the man going on a journey represents Jesus and his servants represent us. what about the talents? what do they represent?
i used to think that the talents represent our abilities. however, the parable of the talents says that the man entrusted his talents to his servants, each according to his ability. the talents do not represent our abilities but our ministries. of course, both our abilities and our ministries are from God and for God.
God would never give us certain abilities without also calling us to corresponding ministries. at the same time, God would never call us to certain ministries without also giving us corresponding abilities. for example, God would never give someone the gift of teaching without also calling him to be a teacher. at the same time, God would never call someone to be a teacher without also giving him the gift of teaching.
"Now finish the work, so that your eager willingness to do it may be matched by your completion of it, according to your means. For if the willingness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has, not according to what he does not have." - 2 Corinthians 8:11-12 (NIV)
in the parable of the talents, the servants were judged on what they did with what they had, not on what they did not do with what they did not have. the servant who was entrusted with two talents was judged on what he did with the two talents which he was entrusted with, not on what he did not do with the five talents which he was not entrusted with.
at the end of the day, we should 'use whatever gift [we have] received to serve others, faithfully administering God's grace in its various forms' (1 Peter 4:10, NIV). we should seek to do what God has called us to do and resist what God has not called us to do, not resist what God has called us to do or seek to do what God has not called us to do.
"For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him." - Matthew 25:29 (NIV)
"From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." - Luke 12:48 (NIV)
*****
there is a huge difference between the concept of justification by works and the concept of salvation by works. the concept of justification by works implies that God judges us on what we do with what we have (not what we do not do with what we do not have), while the concept of salvation by works implies that God counts us righteous in our works (instead of in Christ's work on the cross). the concept of justification by works is biblical, while the concept of salvation by works is unbiblical. as N.T. Wright points out, 'some Christians have used terms like 'justification' and 'salvation' as though they were almost interchangeable, but this is clearly untrue to Scripture itself'.
[Scripture does not teach salvation by works (even as it teaches justification by works). for that matter, Scripture does not teach salvation by faith (even as it teaches justification by faith). rather, Scripture teaches salvation by grace through faith.
this is not just semantics! there is a huge difference between the concept of salvation by grace through faith and the concept of salvation by faith. the concept of salvation by grace through faith implies that salvation is unconditionally given by God by grace and conditionally received by man through faith, while the concept of salvation by faith implies that salvation is conditionally given by God based on man's faith. the concept of salvation by grace through faith is biblical, while the concept of salvation by faith is unbiblical.]
if you equate the concept of justification by works to the concept of salvation by works, then of course the concept of justification by works is unbiblical - because the concept of salvation by works is unbiblical. but if you recognise that there is a huge difference between the concept of justification by works and the concept of salvation by works, then suddenly the concept of justification by works isn't unbiblical after all.
"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." - Ephesians 2:8-10 (NIV)
"You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." - James 2:24 (NIV)
Thursday 26 February 2009
the meaning of purity
Purity, I fear, has gotten mixed up in people's minds with the caricature of Puritanism, which, in the popular imagination, is a dour, brittle revolt against all the pleasures of the flesh. Puritans were in fact very earthy people, robust in their affirmation of life, not by any means "Victorian" (another word grossly misunderstood today in being made a synonym for all that is negative).
Neither the concept of purity nor the doctrines of the Puritans deny life. Rather they refer back to the very Giver of Life Himself. Purity means freedom from contamination, from anything that would spoil the taste or the pleasure, reduce the power, or in any way adulterate what the thing was meant to be. It means cleanness, clearness - no additives, nothing artificial - in other words, "all natural," in the sense in which the Original Designer designed it to be.
- Elisabeth Elliot, Passion and Purity: Learning to Bring Your Love Life Under Christ's Control
Neither the concept of purity nor the doctrines of the Puritans deny life. Rather they refer back to the very Giver of Life Himself. Purity means freedom from contamination, from anything that would spoil the taste or the pleasure, reduce the power, or in any way adulterate what the thing was meant to be. It means cleanness, clearness - no additives, nothing artificial - in other words, "all natural," in the sense in which the Original Designer designed it to be.
- Elisabeth Elliot, Passion and Purity: Learning to Bring Your Love Life Under Christ's Control
Wednesday 25 February 2009
the meaning of justification
Some Christians have used terms like 'justification' and 'salvation' as though they were almost interchangeable, but this is clearly untrue to Scripture itself. 'Justification' is the act of God by which people are 'declared to be in the right' before him: so say the great Reformation theologians, John Piper included. Yes, indeed. Of course. But what does that declaration involve? How does it come about? Piper insists that 'justification' means the 'imputation' of the 'righteousness' - the perfect obedience of Jesus Christ - to the sinner, clothing him or her with that status from the first moment of faith to the final arrival in heaven. I understand the force of that proposal, and the sense of assurance which it gives. What's more, I agree that this sense of assurance is indeed offered by the doctrine of justification as Paul expounds it. But as I argue in this book, Paul's way of doing it is not Piper's. Paul's doctrine of justification is the place where four themes meet, which Piper, and others like him, have managed to ignore or sideline.
First, Paul's doctrine of justification is about the work of Jesus the Messiah of Israel. You cannot understand what Paul says about Jesus, and about the significance of his death for our justification and salvation, unless you see Jesus as the one in whom 'all the promises of God find their Yes' (2 Corinthians 1.20). For many writers, of whom Piper is not untypical, the long story of Israel seems to function merely as a backdrop, a source of proof-texts and types, rather than as itself the story of God's saving purposes. Piper and others like him have accused me of downplaying the significance of the saving, indeed substitutionary, death of Jesus within Paul's doctrine of justification. I hope this book will put such suggestions to rest - while reminding my critics of how that part of Paul's theology actually works.
Second, Paul's doctrine of justification is therefore about what we may call the covenant - the covenant God made with Abraham, the covenant whose purpose was from the beginning the saving call of a worldwide family through whom God's saving purposes for the world were to be realised. For Piper, and many like him, the very idea of a 'covenant' of this kind remains strangely foreign and alien. He and others have accused me of inventing the idea of Israel's story as an ongoing narrative in which the 'exile' in Babylon was 'extended' by hundreds of years so that Jews in Paul's day were still waiting for the 'end of exile', the true fulfillment of the covenant promises. Despite the strong covenantal theology of John Calvin himself, and his positive reading of the story of Israel as fulfilled in Jesus Christ, many who claim Calvinist or 'Reformed' heritage today resist applying it in the way that, as I argue in this book, Paul himself does, in line with the solid biblical foundations for the 'continuing exile' theme.
Third, Paul's doctrine of justification is focused on the divine lawcourt. God, as judge, 'finds in favour of', and hence acquits from their sin, those who believe in Jesus Christ. The word 'justify' has this lawcourt as its metaphorical home base. For John Piper and others who share his perspective, the lawcourt imagery is read differently, with attention shifting rather to the supposed moral achievement of Jesus in gaining, through his perfect obedience, a 'righteousness' which can then be passed across to his faithful people. Piper and others have accused me of superimposing this 'lawcourt' framework on Paul; I argue that it is Paul himself who insists on it.
Fourth, Paul's doctrine of justification is bound up with eschatology, that is, his vision of God's future for the whole world and for his people. Right through Paul's writings, but once more especially in Romans, he envisages two moments, the final justification when God puts the whole world right and raises his people from the dead, and the present justification in which that moment is anticipated. For John Piper and the school of thought he represents, present justification appears to take the full weight. Piper and others have then accused me of encouraging people to think of their own moral effort as contributing to their final justification, and hence of compromising the gospel itself. I insist that I am simply trying to do justice to what Paul actually says, and that when we factor in the Spirit to the whole picture we see that the charge is groundless.
- N.T. Wright, Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision
First, Paul's doctrine of justification is about the work of Jesus the Messiah of Israel. You cannot understand what Paul says about Jesus, and about the significance of his death for our justification and salvation, unless you see Jesus as the one in whom 'all the promises of God find their Yes' (2 Corinthians 1.20). For many writers, of whom Piper is not untypical, the long story of Israel seems to function merely as a backdrop, a source of proof-texts and types, rather than as itself the story of God's saving purposes. Piper and others like him have accused me of downplaying the significance of the saving, indeed substitutionary, death of Jesus within Paul's doctrine of justification. I hope this book will put such suggestions to rest - while reminding my critics of how that part of Paul's theology actually works.
Second, Paul's doctrine of justification is therefore about what we may call the covenant - the covenant God made with Abraham, the covenant whose purpose was from the beginning the saving call of a worldwide family through whom God's saving purposes for the world were to be realised. For Piper, and many like him, the very idea of a 'covenant' of this kind remains strangely foreign and alien. He and others have accused me of inventing the idea of Israel's story as an ongoing narrative in which the 'exile' in Babylon was 'extended' by hundreds of years so that Jews in Paul's day were still waiting for the 'end of exile', the true fulfillment of the covenant promises. Despite the strong covenantal theology of John Calvin himself, and his positive reading of the story of Israel as fulfilled in Jesus Christ, many who claim Calvinist or 'Reformed' heritage today resist applying it in the way that, as I argue in this book, Paul himself does, in line with the solid biblical foundations for the 'continuing exile' theme.
Third, Paul's doctrine of justification is focused on the divine lawcourt. God, as judge, 'finds in favour of', and hence acquits from their sin, those who believe in Jesus Christ. The word 'justify' has this lawcourt as its metaphorical home base. For John Piper and others who share his perspective, the lawcourt imagery is read differently, with attention shifting rather to the supposed moral achievement of Jesus in gaining, through his perfect obedience, a 'righteousness' which can then be passed across to his faithful people. Piper and others have accused me of superimposing this 'lawcourt' framework on Paul; I argue that it is Paul himself who insists on it.
Fourth, Paul's doctrine of justification is bound up with eschatology, that is, his vision of God's future for the whole world and for his people. Right through Paul's writings, but once more especially in Romans, he envisages two moments, the final justification when God puts the whole world right and raises his people from the dead, and the present justification in which that moment is anticipated. For John Piper and the school of thought he represents, present justification appears to take the full weight. Piper and others have then accused me of encouraging people to think of their own moral effort as contributing to their final justification, and hence of compromising the gospel itself. I insist that I am simply trying to do justice to what Paul actually says, and that when we factor in the Spirit to the whole picture we see that the charge is groundless.
- N.T. Wright, Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision
Tuesday 24 February 2009
what is history?
When we attempt to answer the question, What is history?, our answer, consciously or unconsciously, reflects our own position in time, and forms part of our answer to the broader question, what view we take of the society in which we live. I have no fear that my subject may, on closer inspection, seem trivial. I am afraid only that I may seem presumptuous to have broached a question so vast and so important.
- E.H. Carr, What is History?
What I am, therefore, is in key part what I inherit, a specific past that is present to some degree in my present. I find myself part of a history and that is generally to say, whether I like it or not, whether I recognise it or not, one of the bearers of a tradition.
- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue
now, i have nothing against the reformation. in fact, i would characterise my own theological convictions as reformed, indeed calvinist. but as good historians, we must recognise that the reformation is after all a tradition, a product of its times.
in particular, we must recognise that the phrase 'justification by faith alone' is after all a tradition, a product of its times. it was coined in response to the perceived corruption of the catholic church, which apparently diminished Christ's work on the cross by preaching 'justification by works'.
the truth is, there are two kinds of justification - justification by faith in the present and justification by works in the future. just because we are not justified by works in the present does not mean that we are not justified by works in the future, or that we are justified by faith alone. the phrase 'justification by faith alone' is not only not biblical, it is actually unbiblical.
But the point is this: there is no neutral, 'ordinary reading'. What seems 'ordinary' to one person will seem extraordinary to others. There are readings which have grown up in various traditions, and all need testing historically and exegetically as well as theologically. And, as I have argued before and hope to show here once more, many of the supposedly 'ordinary readings' within the Western Protestant traditions have simply not paid attention to what Paul actually wrote...
The rules of engagement for any debate about Paul must be, therefore: exegesis first and foremost, with all historical tools in full play, not to dominate or to squeeze the text out of the shape into which it naturally forms itself, but to support and illuminate a text-sensitive, argument-sensitive, nuance-sensitive reading.
One of the first insights I came to in the early stages of my doctoral work on Romans, wrestling with the commentaries of the 1950s and 1960s as well as with the great traditions (which I respected then and respect still) of Luther and Calvin, was that, when you hear yourself saying, 'What Paul was really trying to say was...' and then coming up with a sentence which only tangentially corresponds to what Paul actually wrote, it is time to think again.
When, however, you work to and fro, this way and that, probing a key technical term here, exploring a larger controlling narrative there, enquiring why Paul used this particular connecting word between these two sentences, or that particular scriptural quotation at this point in the argument, and eventually you arrive at the position of saying, 'Stand here; look at things in this light; keep in mind this great biblical theme, and then you will see that Paul has said exactly what he meant, neither more nor less' - then you know that you are in business.
Even if - perhaps especially if! - it turns out that he is not talking about what we thought he should have been, or that he is not saying exactly what our tradition, or our favourite sermon, had expected him to say about it.
- N.T. Wright, Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision
- E.H. Carr, What is History?
What I am, therefore, is in key part what I inherit, a specific past that is present to some degree in my present. I find myself part of a history and that is generally to say, whether I like it or not, whether I recognise it or not, one of the bearers of a tradition.
- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue
now, i have nothing against the reformation. in fact, i would characterise my own theological convictions as reformed, indeed calvinist. but as good historians, we must recognise that the reformation is after all a tradition, a product of its times.
in particular, we must recognise that the phrase 'justification by faith alone' is after all a tradition, a product of its times. it was coined in response to the perceived corruption of the catholic church, which apparently diminished Christ's work on the cross by preaching 'justification by works'.
the truth is, there are two kinds of justification - justification by faith in the present and justification by works in the future. just because we are not justified by works in the present does not mean that we are not justified by works in the future, or that we are justified by faith alone. the phrase 'justification by faith alone' is not only not biblical, it is actually unbiblical.
But the point is this: there is no neutral, 'ordinary reading'. What seems 'ordinary' to one person will seem extraordinary to others. There are readings which have grown up in various traditions, and all need testing historically and exegetically as well as theologically. And, as I have argued before and hope to show here once more, many of the supposedly 'ordinary readings' within the Western Protestant traditions have simply not paid attention to what Paul actually wrote...
The rules of engagement for any debate about Paul must be, therefore: exegesis first and foremost, with all historical tools in full play, not to dominate or to squeeze the text out of the shape into which it naturally forms itself, but to support and illuminate a text-sensitive, argument-sensitive, nuance-sensitive reading.
One of the first insights I came to in the early stages of my doctoral work on Romans, wrestling with the commentaries of the 1950s and 1960s as well as with the great traditions (which I respected then and respect still) of Luther and Calvin, was that, when you hear yourself saying, 'What Paul was really trying to say was...' and then coming up with a sentence which only tangentially corresponds to what Paul actually wrote, it is time to think again.
When, however, you work to and fro, this way and that, probing a key technical term here, exploring a larger controlling narrative there, enquiring why Paul used this particular connecting word between these two sentences, or that particular scriptural quotation at this point in the argument, and eventually you arrive at the position of saying, 'Stand here; look at things in this light; keep in mind this great biblical theme, and then you will see that Paul has said exactly what he meant, neither more nor less' - then you know that you are in business.
Even if - perhaps especially if! - it turns out that he is not talking about what we thought he should have been, or that he is not saying exactly what our tradition, or our favourite sermon, had expected him to say about it.
- N.T. Wright, Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision
Monday 23 February 2009
justice and justification
it is indeed uncanny how political philosophy and theology interact with each other. i don't think it is a coincidence that God has led me to take a module on justice (as part of my degree) and simultaneously brought me to the point (in my walk with Him) where questions of justification naturally arise from new perspectives on faith and works, moderate "middle knowledge" calvinism and the new creation. in fact, the copy of N.T. Wright's response to John Piper on the future of justification which i pre-ordered online arrived in the post two days ago and i'm currently working my way through it.
hopefully my study of justice will build on my study of justification, and my study of justification will build on my study of justice. for that matter, hopefully my study of philosophy will build on my study of theology, and my study of theology will build on my study of philosophy. after all, philosophy is the handmaiden of theology.
What is just and unjust is usually in dispute. Men disagree about which principles should define the basic terms of their association. Yet we may still say, despite this disagreement, that they each have a conception of justice. That is, they understand the need for, and they are prepared to affirm, a characteristic set of principles for assigning basic rights and duties and for determining what they take to be the proper distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation.
- John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
For what analysis of A’s [Nozick’s] and B’s [Rawls’] position reveals once again is that we have all too many disparate and rival moral concepts, in this case rival and disparate concepts of justice, and that the moral resources of the culture allow us no way of settling the issue between them rationally. Moral philosophy, as it is dominantly understood, reflects the debates and disagreements of the culture so faithfully that its controversies turn out to be unsettlable in just the way that the political and moral debates themselves are...
[But] what is it about rational argument which is so important that it is the nearly universal appearance assumed by those who engage in moral conflict? Does not this suggest that the practice of moral argument in our culture expresses at least an aspiration to be or to become rational in this area of our lives?
- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue
There are three basic ways of explaining this sense of the echo of a voice, the call to justice, the dream of a world (and all of us within it) put to rights.
We can say, if we like, that it is indeed only a dream, a projection of childish fantasies, and that we have to get used to living in the world the way it is. Down that road we find Machiavelli and Nietzsche, the world of naked power and grabbing what you can get, the world where the only sin is to be caught.
Or we can say, if we like, that the dream is of a different world altogether, a world where we really belong, where everything is indeed put to rights, a world into which we can escape in our dreams in the present and hope to escape one day for good - but a world which has little purchase on the present world except that people who live in this one sometimes find themselves dreaming of that one. That leaves the unscrupulous bullies running this world, but it consoles us with the thought that things will be better somewhere, sometime, even if there's not very much we can do about it here and now.
Or we can say, if we like, that the reason we have these dreams, the reason we have a sense of a memory of the echo of a voice, is that there is someone there speaking to us, whispering in our inner ear, someone who cares very much about this present world, and our present selves, and who has made us, and it, for a purpose which will indeed involve justice, things being put to rights, ourselves being put to rights, the world being rescued at last.
- N.T. Wright, Simply Christian
The Fulfillment of the Law
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." - Matthew 5:17 (NIV)
"[Jesus] said to [His disciples], "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."" - Luke 24:44 (NIV)
"But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished - he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus." - Romans 3:21-26 (NIV)
There is a real moral conflict in the cross, one so great that many liberal theologians have considered the doctrine of the substitutionary atonement to be essentially immoral. The two moral principles are that the innocent should not be punished for sins he never committed, but that Christ was punished for our sins (Isa. 53; 1 Pet. 2:24; 3:15; 2 Cor. 5:21).
Some have tried to solve the problem by suggesting that Christ submitted to this punishment voluntarily, and hence the moral responsibility for the conflict disappears. But this is like saying it was not immoral for Jim Jones to order the Jonestown suicide because his followers did it willingly!
Other attempted explanations make God's actions in the cross entirely arbitrary, with no necessary basis in his unchanging moral character. But this reduces God to an unworthy being and takes away the need for the cross. If God could save men apart from the cross, then Christ's death becomes unnecessary.
- Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics
the only way to resolve the real moral conflict in the cross is to understand the cross as the place where justice and love meet.
See from His head, His hands, His feet
Sorrow and love flow mingled down
Did e’er such love and sorrow meet
Or thorns compose so rich a crown?
yes, justice is the fulfillment of the law - but so is love!
"Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbour as yourself." Love does no harm to its neighbour. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." - Romans 13:8-10 (NIV)
*****
The last contrast that I shall mention now is that utilitarianism is a teleological theory whereas justice as fairness is not. By definition, then, the latter is a deontological theory, one that either does not specify the good independently from the right, or does not interpret the right as maximising the good.
(It should be noted that deontological theories are defined as non-teleological ones, not as views that characterise the rightness of institutions and acts independently from their consequences. All ethical doctrines worth our attention take consequences into account in judging rightness. One which did not would simply be irrational, crazy.)
- John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
Isn't doing the greatest good what utilitarianism holds? How does graded absolutism differ from it? There is a basic difference between graded absolutism and utilitarianism. First of all, utilitarianism is teleological (end-centered), but graded absolutism is a deontological (duty-centered) ethic. When graded absolutists speak of "greater good," they do not mean greater results but the higher rule. They are not referring to a higher end but a higher norm. Furthermore, the basis for their action is not future consequences (the long run) but present commands (the short run).
Of course, any ethic is obliged to consider the possible results of actions, but this does not make them utilitarian. But graded absolutism, in contrast to utilitarianism, holds that following moral rules God has established will bring about the best results. It does not believe that man's calculation of the best results will determine what the best rules should be. We keep the rules and leave the long-range consequences to God.
- Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics
links: political philosophy and theology (21 nov 08), education sentimentale (11 feb 09), justice and love (23 mar 09)
hopefully my study of justice will build on my study of justification, and my study of justification will build on my study of justice. for that matter, hopefully my study of philosophy will build on my study of theology, and my study of theology will build on my study of philosophy. after all, philosophy is the handmaiden of theology.
What is just and unjust is usually in dispute. Men disagree about which principles should define the basic terms of their association. Yet we may still say, despite this disagreement, that they each have a conception of justice. That is, they understand the need for, and they are prepared to affirm, a characteristic set of principles for assigning basic rights and duties and for determining what they take to be the proper distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation.
- John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
For what analysis of A’s [Nozick’s] and B’s [Rawls’] position reveals once again is that we have all too many disparate and rival moral concepts, in this case rival and disparate concepts of justice, and that the moral resources of the culture allow us no way of settling the issue between them rationally. Moral philosophy, as it is dominantly understood, reflects the debates and disagreements of the culture so faithfully that its controversies turn out to be unsettlable in just the way that the political and moral debates themselves are...
[But] what is it about rational argument which is so important that it is the nearly universal appearance assumed by those who engage in moral conflict? Does not this suggest that the practice of moral argument in our culture expresses at least an aspiration to be or to become rational in this area of our lives?
- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue
There are three basic ways of explaining this sense of the echo of a voice, the call to justice, the dream of a world (and all of us within it) put to rights.
We can say, if we like, that it is indeed only a dream, a projection of childish fantasies, and that we have to get used to living in the world the way it is. Down that road we find Machiavelli and Nietzsche, the world of naked power and grabbing what you can get, the world where the only sin is to be caught.
Or we can say, if we like, that the dream is of a different world altogether, a world where we really belong, where everything is indeed put to rights, a world into which we can escape in our dreams in the present and hope to escape one day for good - but a world which has little purchase on the present world except that people who live in this one sometimes find themselves dreaming of that one. That leaves the unscrupulous bullies running this world, but it consoles us with the thought that things will be better somewhere, sometime, even if there's not very much we can do about it here and now.
Or we can say, if we like, that the reason we have these dreams, the reason we have a sense of a memory of the echo of a voice, is that there is someone there speaking to us, whispering in our inner ear, someone who cares very much about this present world, and our present selves, and who has made us, and it, for a purpose which will indeed involve justice, things being put to rights, ourselves being put to rights, the world being rescued at last.
- N.T. Wright, Simply Christian
The Fulfillment of the Law
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." - Matthew 5:17 (NIV)
"[Jesus] said to [His disciples], "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."" - Luke 24:44 (NIV)
"But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished - he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus." - Romans 3:21-26 (NIV)
There is a real moral conflict in the cross, one so great that many liberal theologians have considered the doctrine of the substitutionary atonement to be essentially immoral. The two moral principles are that the innocent should not be punished for sins he never committed, but that Christ was punished for our sins (Isa. 53; 1 Pet. 2:24; 3:15; 2 Cor. 5:21).
Some have tried to solve the problem by suggesting that Christ submitted to this punishment voluntarily, and hence the moral responsibility for the conflict disappears. But this is like saying it was not immoral for Jim Jones to order the Jonestown suicide because his followers did it willingly!
Other attempted explanations make God's actions in the cross entirely arbitrary, with no necessary basis in his unchanging moral character. But this reduces God to an unworthy being and takes away the need for the cross. If God could save men apart from the cross, then Christ's death becomes unnecessary.
- Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics
the only way to resolve the real moral conflict in the cross is to understand the cross as the place where justice and love meet.
See from His head, His hands, His feet
Sorrow and love flow mingled down
Did e’er such love and sorrow meet
Or thorns compose so rich a crown?
yes, justice is the fulfillment of the law - but so is love!
"Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbour as yourself." Love does no harm to its neighbour. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." - Romans 13:8-10 (NIV)
*****
The last contrast that I shall mention now is that utilitarianism is a teleological theory whereas justice as fairness is not. By definition, then, the latter is a deontological theory, one that either does not specify the good independently from the right, or does not interpret the right as maximising the good.
(It should be noted that deontological theories are defined as non-teleological ones, not as views that characterise the rightness of institutions and acts independently from their consequences. All ethical doctrines worth our attention take consequences into account in judging rightness. One which did not would simply be irrational, crazy.)
- John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
Isn't doing the greatest good what utilitarianism holds? How does graded absolutism differ from it? There is a basic difference between graded absolutism and utilitarianism. First of all, utilitarianism is teleological (end-centered), but graded absolutism is a deontological (duty-centered) ethic. When graded absolutists speak of "greater good," they do not mean greater results but the higher rule. They are not referring to a higher end but a higher norm. Furthermore, the basis for their action is not future consequences (the long run) but present commands (the short run).
Of course, any ethic is obliged to consider the possible results of actions, but this does not make them utilitarian. But graded absolutism, in contrast to utilitarianism, holds that following moral rules God has established will bring about the best results. It does not believe that man's calculation of the best results will determine what the best rules should be. We keep the rules and leave the long-range consequences to God.
- Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics
links: political philosophy and theology (21 nov 08), education sentimentale (11 feb 09), justice and love (23 mar 09)
Sunday 22 February 2009
Saturday 21 February 2009
Praise the LORD, O my soul
Praise the LORD, O my soul; all my inmost being, praise his holy name. Praise the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits - who forgives all your sins and heals all your diseases, who redeems your life from the pit and crowns you with love and compassion, who satisfies your desires with good things so that your youth is renewed like the eagle's.
The LORD works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed.
He made known his ways to Moses, his deeds to the people of Israel: The LORD is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love. He will not always accuse, nor will he harbour his anger forever; he does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities.
For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love for those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. As a father has compassion on his children, so the LORD has compassion on those who fear him; for he knows how we are formed, he remembers that we are dust.
As for man, his days are like grass, he flourishes like a flower of the field; the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more. But from everlasting to everlasting the LORD's love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children's children - with those who keep his covenant and remember to obey his precepts.
The LORD has established his throne in heaven, and his kingdom rules over all.
Praise the LORD, you his angels, you mighty ones who do his bidding, who obey his word. Praise the LORD, all his heavenly hosts, you his servants who do his will. Praise the LORD, all his works everywhere in his dominion.
Praise the LORD, O my soul.
- Psalm 103 (NIV)
The LORD is gracious and compassionate
Slow to anger and rich in love
The LORD is gracious and compassionate
Slow to anger and rich in love
And the LORD is good to all
He has compassion on all that he has made
As far as the east is from the west
That's how far He has removed our transgressions from us
As far as the east is from the west
That's how far He has removed our transgressions from us
Praise the LORD, O my soul
Praise the LORD
Praise the LORD, O my soul
Praise the LORD
The LORD works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed.
He made known his ways to Moses, his deeds to the people of Israel: The LORD is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love. He will not always accuse, nor will he harbour his anger forever; he does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities.
For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love for those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. As a father has compassion on his children, so the LORD has compassion on those who fear him; for he knows how we are formed, he remembers that we are dust.
As for man, his days are like grass, he flourishes like a flower of the field; the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more. But from everlasting to everlasting the LORD's love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children's children - with those who keep his covenant and remember to obey his precepts.
The LORD has established his throne in heaven, and his kingdom rules over all.
Praise the LORD, you his angels, you mighty ones who do his bidding, who obey his word. Praise the LORD, all his heavenly hosts, you his servants who do his will. Praise the LORD, all his works everywhere in his dominion.
Praise the LORD, O my soul.
- Psalm 103 (NIV)
The LORD is gracious and compassionate
Slow to anger and rich in love
The LORD is gracious and compassionate
Slow to anger and rich in love
And the LORD is good to all
He has compassion on all that he has made
As far as the east is from the west
That's how far He has removed our transgressions from us
As far as the east is from the west
That's how far He has removed our transgressions from us
Praise the LORD, O my soul
Praise the LORD
Praise the LORD, O my soul
Praise the LORD
Thursday 19 February 2009
the house with the golden windows
There was a boy who lived in a house on one side of a valley. On the other side, there was another house, which he saw everyday, but which he had never visited. To him it was the most wonderful house in the world, for when he looked at it every morning it seemed to have windows of gold, and he always called it the House with the Golden Windows.
One day he decided to visit it. He took a picnic lunch and started out to walk across the valley. At last he reached the house on the other side. At the door there was a boy about his own age. This other boy spoke to him: 'Where do you come from?' The boy said, 'I come from that house that you can see across the valley.' And the other boy said at once, 'You're the boy that lives in the House with the Golden Windows. Every evening I see the windows of your house pure gold.'
'But no,' said the first boy, 'you are the one that lives in the House with the Golden Windows.' 'I'm not,' said the second boy, 'it's you who lives there.' By this time it was evening. 'Look! There's your house and the windows are gold.'
Of course, what really happened was that in the morning the sun shone on the house on one side of the valley, so that it looked as if it had golden windows. In the evening the sun shone on the house on the other side, so that it now seemed to have golden windows. Thus each thought that the other's house had golden windows. In other words, we always think that the other person's life is better than our own.
But there is one thing we must always say: 'God made me as I am, and God put me where I am, and God has something he wants me to do just as I am right here.' Our job is not to envy someone else's life, but to make the very best of our own.
- William Barclay, The Old Law and the New Law
"O, beware, my lord, of jealousy/ It is the green-eyed monster which doth mock/ The meat it feeds on." - Iago in Act 3 Scene 3 of Shakespeare's Othello
two kinds of wisdom
"Who is wise and understanding among you? Let him show it by his good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. But if you harbour bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. Such "wisdom" does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, of the devil. For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.
"But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere. Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness." - James 3:13-18 (NIV)
One day he decided to visit it. He took a picnic lunch and started out to walk across the valley. At last he reached the house on the other side. At the door there was a boy about his own age. This other boy spoke to him: 'Where do you come from?' The boy said, 'I come from that house that you can see across the valley.' And the other boy said at once, 'You're the boy that lives in the House with the Golden Windows. Every evening I see the windows of your house pure gold.'
'But no,' said the first boy, 'you are the one that lives in the House with the Golden Windows.' 'I'm not,' said the second boy, 'it's you who lives there.' By this time it was evening. 'Look! There's your house and the windows are gold.'
Of course, what really happened was that in the morning the sun shone on the house on one side of the valley, so that it looked as if it had golden windows. In the evening the sun shone on the house on the other side, so that it now seemed to have golden windows. Thus each thought that the other's house had golden windows. In other words, we always think that the other person's life is better than our own.
But there is one thing we must always say: 'God made me as I am, and God put me where I am, and God has something he wants me to do just as I am right here.' Our job is not to envy someone else's life, but to make the very best of our own.
- William Barclay, The Old Law and the New Law
"O, beware, my lord, of jealousy/ It is the green-eyed monster which doth mock/ The meat it feeds on." - Iago in Act 3 Scene 3 of Shakespeare's Othello
two kinds of wisdom
"Who is wise and understanding among you? Let him show it by his good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. But if you harbour bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. Such "wisdom" does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, of the devil. For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.
"But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere. Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness." - James 3:13-18 (NIV)
Monday 16 February 2009
how life imitates chess
Consider the example of a highly intelligent seven-year-old child whom I wish to teach to play chess, although the child has no particular desire to learn the game. The child does however have a very strong desire for candy and little chance of obtaining it. I therefore tell the child that if the child will play chess with me once a week I will give the child 50 cents worth of candy; moreover I tell the child that I will always play in such a way that it will be difficult, but not impossible, for the child to win and that, if the child wins, the child will receive an extra 50 cents worth of candy. Thus motivated the child plays and plays to win.
Notice however that, so long as it is the candy alone which provides the child with a good reason for playing chess, the child has no reason not to cheat and every reason to cheat, provided he or she can do so successfully. But, so we may hope, there will come a time when the child will find in those goods specific to chess, in the achievement of a certain highly particular kind of analytical skill, strategic imagination and competitive intensity, a new set of reasons, reasons now not just for winning on a particular occasion, but for trying to excel in whatever way the game of chess demands. Now if the child cheats, he or she will be defeating not me, but himself or herself.
There are thus two kinds of good possibly to be gained by playing chess. On the one hand there are those goods externally and contingently attached to chess-playing and to other practices by the accidents of social circumstance - in the case of the imaginary child candy, in the case of real adults such goods as prestige, status and money. There are always alternative ways for achieving such goods, and their achievement is never to be had only by engaging in some particular kind of practice.
On the other hand there are the goods internal to the practice of chess which cannot be had in any way but by playing chess or some other game of that specific kind. We call them internal for two reasons: first, as I have already suggested, because we can only specify them in terms of chess or some other game of that specific kind and by means of examples from such games (otherwise the meagerness of our vocabulary for speaking of such goods forces us into such devices as my own resort to writing of 'a certain highly particular kind of'); and secondly because they can only be identified and recognised by the experience of participating in the practice in question. Those who lack the relevant experience are incompetent thereby as judges of internal goods.
- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue
It wouldn't have been possible for me to stay at the top for so long without the education Karpov gave me about my own game. Not just revealing to me the weaknesses, but the importance of finding them for myself. I didn't fully realise it at the time, but the notorious "Marathon Match" showed me the key to success. It's not enough to be talented. It's not enough to work hard and to study late into the night. You must also become intimately aware of the methods you use to reach your decisions.
Self-awareness is essential to being able to combine your knowledge, experience, and talent to reach your peak performance. Few people ever perform this sort of analysis. Every decision stems from an internal process, whether at the chessboard, in the White House, in the boardroom, or at the kitchen table. The subject matter of those decisions will be different, but the process can be very similar.
- Garry Kasparov, How Life Imitates Chess
as a chessplayer, i recognise that there are goods internal to the practice of chess which cannot be had in any way but by playing chess. playing chess is not about winning (instead of losing), but about the quest for perfection. i would rather play a perfect game and draw, than play an imperfect game and win. of course, no one knows what the perfect game is - yet.
as a Christian, i recognise that there is the fruit of the Spirit - internal to being in Christ - which cannot be had in any way but by being in Christ. being in Christ is not about going to heaven (instead of hell) when we die, but about being filled with the Spirit, bearing the fruit of the Spirit, anticipating in the present the verdict which will be reaffirmed in the future.
[no one goes to heaven when they die. in fact, everyone goes to hell (not purgatory) when they die. the concept of going to heaven (instead of hell) when we die is our Western reshaping of the story of the Bible, our fitting of it into different categories.]
it is ironic that we sometimes think that the purpose-driven life is to die and go to heaven, even though Jesus came 'that [we] may have life, and have it to the full' (John 10:10, NIV). death is always and everywhere an evil. how can we live to die, when Jesus died 'that we might live through him' (1 John 4:9, NIV)?
Jesus did not die so that we can go to heaven when we die. Jesus died so that we can build for the kingdom on the crucified and risen Messiah, the Church's one foundation, Jesus Christ her Lord.
[when Paul says that he 'desire[s] to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far' (Philippians 1:23, NIV), he does not mean that he desires to die and go to heaven. rather, he means that he desires the return of Christ,
"For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever." - 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 (NIV)
in other words, Paul is not talking about life after death, but about life after life after death.]
"Jesus said to [Martha], "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"" - John 11:25-26 (NIV)
Notice however that, so long as it is the candy alone which provides the child with a good reason for playing chess, the child has no reason not to cheat and every reason to cheat, provided he or she can do so successfully. But, so we may hope, there will come a time when the child will find in those goods specific to chess, in the achievement of a certain highly particular kind of analytical skill, strategic imagination and competitive intensity, a new set of reasons, reasons now not just for winning on a particular occasion, but for trying to excel in whatever way the game of chess demands. Now if the child cheats, he or she will be defeating not me, but himself or herself.
There are thus two kinds of good possibly to be gained by playing chess. On the one hand there are those goods externally and contingently attached to chess-playing and to other practices by the accidents of social circumstance - in the case of the imaginary child candy, in the case of real adults such goods as prestige, status and money. There are always alternative ways for achieving such goods, and their achievement is never to be had only by engaging in some particular kind of practice.
On the other hand there are the goods internal to the practice of chess which cannot be had in any way but by playing chess or some other game of that specific kind. We call them internal for two reasons: first, as I have already suggested, because we can only specify them in terms of chess or some other game of that specific kind and by means of examples from such games (otherwise the meagerness of our vocabulary for speaking of such goods forces us into such devices as my own resort to writing of 'a certain highly particular kind of'); and secondly because they can only be identified and recognised by the experience of participating in the practice in question. Those who lack the relevant experience are incompetent thereby as judges of internal goods.
- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue
It wouldn't have been possible for me to stay at the top for so long without the education Karpov gave me about my own game. Not just revealing to me the weaknesses, but the importance of finding them for myself. I didn't fully realise it at the time, but the notorious "Marathon Match" showed me the key to success. It's not enough to be talented. It's not enough to work hard and to study late into the night. You must also become intimately aware of the methods you use to reach your decisions.
Self-awareness is essential to being able to combine your knowledge, experience, and talent to reach your peak performance. Few people ever perform this sort of analysis. Every decision stems from an internal process, whether at the chessboard, in the White House, in the boardroom, or at the kitchen table. The subject matter of those decisions will be different, but the process can be very similar.
- Garry Kasparov, How Life Imitates Chess
as a chessplayer, i recognise that there are goods internal to the practice of chess which cannot be had in any way but by playing chess. playing chess is not about winning (instead of losing), but about the quest for perfection. i would rather play a perfect game and draw, than play an imperfect game and win. of course, no one knows what the perfect game is - yet.
as a Christian, i recognise that there is the fruit of the Spirit - internal to being in Christ - which cannot be had in any way but by being in Christ. being in Christ is not about going to heaven (instead of hell) when we die, but about being filled with the Spirit, bearing the fruit of the Spirit, anticipating in the present the verdict which will be reaffirmed in the future.
[no one goes to heaven when they die. in fact, everyone goes to hell (not purgatory) when they die. the concept of going to heaven (instead of hell) when we die is our Western reshaping of the story of the Bible, our fitting of it into different categories.]
it is ironic that we sometimes think that the purpose-driven life is to die and go to heaven, even though Jesus came 'that [we] may have life, and have it to the full' (John 10:10, NIV). death is always and everywhere an evil. how can we live to die, when Jesus died 'that we might live through him' (1 John 4:9, NIV)?
Jesus did not die so that we can go to heaven when we die. Jesus died so that we can build for the kingdom on the crucified and risen Messiah, the Church's one foundation, Jesus Christ her Lord.
[when Paul says that he 'desire[s] to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far' (Philippians 1:23, NIV), he does not mean that he desires to die and go to heaven. rather, he means that he desires the return of Christ,
"For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever." - 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 (NIV)
in other words, Paul is not talking about life after death, but about life after life after death.]
"Jesus said to [Martha], "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"" - John 11:25-26 (NIV)
Saturday 14 February 2009
The Proverbs 31 Woman
A wife of noble character who can find? She is worth far more than rubies.
Her husband has full confidence in her and lacks nothing of value.
She brings him good, not harm, all the days of her life.
She selects wool and flax and works with eager hands.
She is like the merchant ships, bringing her food from afar.
She gets up while it is still dark; she provides food for her family and portions for her servant girls.
She considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
She sets about her work vigorously; her arms are strong for her tasks.
She sees that her trading is profitable, and her lamp does not go out at night.
In her hand she holds the distaff and grasps the spindle with her fingers.
She opens her arms to the poor and extends her hands to the needy.
When it snows, she has no fear for her household; for all of them are clothed in scarlet.
She makes coverings for her bed; she is clothed in fine linen and purple.
Her husband is respected at the city gate, where he takes his seat among the elders of the land.
She makes linen garments and sells them, and supplies the merchants with sashes.
She is clothed with strength and dignity; she can laugh at the days to come.
She speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue.
She watches over the affairs of her household and does not eat the bread of idleness.
Her children arise and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her:
"Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all."
Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.
Give her the reward she has earned, and let her works bring her praise at the city gate.
- Proverbs 31:10-31 (NIV)
On one level, Proverbs 31:10-31 is an acrostic about the complete wife - not from man's perspective, but from God's perspective.
There are 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet; each of the 22 verses in Proverbs 31:10-31 begins with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet, signifying completion.
On another level, Proverbs 31:10-31 is the climax of the book of Proverbs, which is 'for attaining wisdom and discipline; for understanding words of insight; for acquiring a disciplined and prudent life, doing what is right and just and fair; for giving prudence to the simple, knowledge and discretion to the young - let the wise listen and add to their learning, and let the discerning get guidance - for understanding proverbs and parables, the sayings and riddles of the wise' (Proverbs 1:2-6, NIV).
Indeed, the book of Proverbs is more than just a book about the complete wife. It is a book about the complete life. Two ways to live - 'the wife of your youth' (Proverbs 5:18, NIV) vs 'an adulteress' (Proverbs 5:20, NIV), Wisdom (Proverbs 9:1, NIV) vs Folly (Proverbs 9:13, NIV), 'the way of understanding' (Proverbs 9:6, NIV) vs 'the depths of the grave' (Proverbs 9:18, NIV)!
"Wisdom has built her house; she has hewn out its seven* pillars. She has prepared her meat and mixed her wine; she has also set her table. She has sent out her maids, and she calls from the highest point of the city. "Let all who are simple come in here!" she says to those who lack judgment. "Come, eat my food and drink the wine I have mixed. Leave your simple ways and you will live; walk in the way of understanding."" - Proverbs 9:1-6 (NIV)
*also signifying completion
"The woman Folly is loud; she is undisciplined and without knowledge. She sits at the door of her house, on a seat at the highest point of the city, calling out to those who pass by, who go straight on their way. "Let all who are simple come in here!" she says to those who lack judgment. "Stolen water is sweet; food eaten in secret is delicious!" But little do they know that the dead are there, that her guests are in the depths of the grave." - Proverbs 9:13-18 (NIV)
The Offer of Life or Death
"Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.
"See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
"But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.
"This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the LORD is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." - Deuteronomy 30:11-20 (NIV)
Links: The Wife of Noble Character (14 Feb 10), A wife of noble character who can find? (5 May 10), The Man of Noble Character (6 Sep 10), The Psalm 112 Man (9 Sep 10)
Her husband has full confidence in her and lacks nothing of value.
She brings him good, not harm, all the days of her life.
She selects wool and flax and works with eager hands.
She is like the merchant ships, bringing her food from afar.
She gets up while it is still dark; she provides food for her family and portions for her servant girls.
She considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
She sets about her work vigorously; her arms are strong for her tasks.
She sees that her trading is profitable, and her lamp does not go out at night.
In her hand she holds the distaff and grasps the spindle with her fingers.
She opens her arms to the poor and extends her hands to the needy.
When it snows, she has no fear for her household; for all of them are clothed in scarlet.
She makes coverings for her bed; she is clothed in fine linen and purple.
Her husband is respected at the city gate, where he takes his seat among the elders of the land.
She makes linen garments and sells them, and supplies the merchants with sashes.
She is clothed with strength and dignity; she can laugh at the days to come.
She speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue.
She watches over the affairs of her household and does not eat the bread of idleness.
Her children arise and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her:
"Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all."
Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.
Give her the reward she has earned, and let her works bring her praise at the city gate.
- Proverbs 31:10-31 (NIV)
On one level, Proverbs 31:10-31 is an acrostic about the complete wife - not from man's perspective, but from God's perspective.
There are 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet; each of the 22 verses in Proverbs 31:10-31 begins with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet, signifying completion.
On another level, Proverbs 31:10-31 is the climax of the book of Proverbs, which is 'for attaining wisdom and discipline; for understanding words of insight; for acquiring a disciplined and prudent life, doing what is right and just and fair; for giving prudence to the simple, knowledge and discretion to the young - let the wise listen and add to their learning, and let the discerning get guidance - for understanding proverbs and parables, the sayings and riddles of the wise' (Proverbs 1:2-6, NIV).
Indeed, the book of Proverbs is more than just a book about the complete wife. It is a book about the complete life. Two ways to live - 'the wife of your youth' (Proverbs 5:18, NIV) vs 'an adulteress' (Proverbs 5:20, NIV), Wisdom (Proverbs 9:1, NIV) vs Folly (Proverbs 9:13, NIV), 'the way of understanding' (Proverbs 9:6, NIV) vs 'the depths of the grave' (Proverbs 9:18, NIV)!
"Wisdom has built her house; she has hewn out its seven* pillars. She has prepared her meat and mixed her wine; she has also set her table. She has sent out her maids, and she calls from the highest point of the city. "Let all who are simple come in here!" she says to those who lack judgment. "Come, eat my food and drink the wine I have mixed. Leave your simple ways and you will live; walk in the way of understanding."" - Proverbs 9:1-6 (NIV)
*also signifying completion
"The woman Folly is loud; she is undisciplined and without knowledge. She sits at the door of her house, on a seat at the highest point of the city, calling out to those who pass by, who go straight on their way. "Let all who are simple come in here!" she says to those who lack judgment. "Stolen water is sweet; food eaten in secret is delicious!" But little do they know that the dead are there, that her guests are in the depths of the grave." - Proverbs 9:13-18 (NIV)
The Offer of Life or Death
"Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.
"See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
"But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.
"This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the LORD is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." - Deuteronomy 30:11-20 (NIV)
Links: The Wife of Noble Character (14 Feb 10), A wife of noble character who can find? (5 May 10), The Man of Noble Character (6 Sep 10), The Psalm 112 Man (9 Sep 10)
Wednesday 11 February 2009
education sentimentale
it is uncanny how political philosophy and theology interact with each other. last term, i studied John Rawls' A Theory of Justice. this term, i'm studying Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue. both texts remind me of pieces which C.S. Lewis wrote - A Theory of Justice reminds me of The Four Loves and After Virtue reminds me of The Weight of Glory.
Virtues are dispositions not only to act in particular ways, but also to feel in particular ways. To act virtuously is not, as Kant was later to think, to act against inclination; it is to act from inclination formed by the cultivation of the virtues. Moral education is an 'education sentimentale'.
- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue
If you asked twenty good men today what they thought the highest of the virtues, nineteen of them would reply, Unselfishness. But if you asked almost any of the great Christians of old he would have replied, Love. You see what has happened? A negative term has been substituted for a positive, and this is of more than philological importance. The negative ideal of Unselfishness carries with it the suggestion not primarily of securing good things for others, but of going without them ourselves, as if our abstinence and not their happiness was the important point. I do not think this is the Christian virtue of Love.
The New Testament has lots to say about self-denial, but not about self-denial as an end in itself. We are told to deny ourselves and to take up our crosses in order that we may follow Christ; and nearly every description of what we shall ultimately find if we do so contains an appeal to desire. If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith.
Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.
- C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory
"Delight yourself in the LORD and he will give you the desires of your heart." - Psalm 37:4 (NIV)
"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." - Matthew 11:28-30 (NIV)
"This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God." - 1 John 5:3-5 (NIV)
the question is not why we should want to be Christian Hedonists. the question is why we should not want to be Christian Hedonists.
*****
Christian Hedonism is a philosophy of life built on the following five convictions:
1. The longing to be happy is a universal human experience, and it is good, not sinful.
2. We should never try to deny or resist our longing to be happy, as though it were a bad impulse. Instead, we should seek to intensify this longing and nourish it with whatever will provide the deepest and most enduring satisfaction.
3. The deepest and most enduring happiness is found only in God. Not from God, but in God.
4. The happiness we find in God reaches its consummation when it is shared with others in the manifold ways of love.
5. To the extent we try to abandon the pursuit of our own pleasure, we fail to honour God and love people. Or, to put it positively: the pursuit of pleasure is a necessary part of all worship and virtue. That is,
The chief end of man is to glorify God by enjoying Him forever.
- John Piper, Desiring God
*****
Made for spirituality, we wallow in introspection. Made for joy, we settle for pleasure. Made for justice, we clamour for vengeance. Made for relationship, we insist on our own way. Made for beauty, we are satisfied with sentiment. But new creation has already begun. The sun has begun to rise. Christians are called to leave behind, in the tomb of Jesus Christ, all that belongs to the brokenness and incompleteness of the present world.
It is time, in the power of the Spirit, to take up our proper role, our fully human role, as agents, heralds and stewards of the new day that is dawning. That, quite simply, is what it means to be Christian, to follow Jesus Christ into the new world, God's new world, which he has thrown open before us.
- N.T. Wright, Simply Christian
links: political philosophy and theology (21 nov 08), justice and justification (23 feb 09), justice and love (23 mar 09)
Virtues are dispositions not only to act in particular ways, but also to feel in particular ways. To act virtuously is not, as Kant was later to think, to act against inclination; it is to act from inclination formed by the cultivation of the virtues. Moral education is an 'education sentimentale'.
- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue
If you asked twenty good men today what they thought the highest of the virtues, nineteen of them would reply, Unselfishness. But if you asked almost any of the great Christians of old he would have replied, Love. You see what has happened? A negative term has been substituted for a positive, and this is of more than philological importance. The negative ideal of Unselfishness carries with it the suggestion not primarily of securing good things for others, but of going without them ourselves, as if our abstinence and not their happiness was the important point. I do not think this is the Christian virtue of Love.
The New Testament has lots to say about self-denial, but not about self-denial as an end in itself. We are told to deny ourselves and to take up our crosses in order that we may follow Christ; and nearly every description of what we shall ultimately find if we do so contains an appeal to desire. If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith.
Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.
- C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory
"Delight yourself in the LORD and he will give you the desires of your heart." - Psalm 37:4 (NIV)
"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." - Matthew 11:28-30 (NIV)
"This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God." - 1 John 5:3-5 (NIV)
the question is not why we should want to be Christian Hedonists. the question is why we should not want to be Christian Hedonists.
*****
Christian Hedonism is a philosophy of life built on the following five convictions:
1. The longing to be happy is a universal human experience, and it is good, not sinful.
2. We should never try to deny or resist our longing to be happy, as though it were a bad impulse. Instead, we should seek to intensify this longing and nourish it with whatever will provide the deepest and most enduring satisfaction.
3. The deepest and most enduring happiness is found only in God. Not from God, but in God.
4. The happiness we find in God reaches its consummation when it is shared with others in the manifold ways of love.
5. To the extent we try to abandon the pursuit of our own pleasure, we fail to honour God and love people. Or, to put it positively: the pursuit of pleasure is a necessary part of all worship and virtue. That is,
The chief end of man is to glorify God by enjoying Him forever.
- John Piper, Desiring God
*****
Made for spirituality, we wallow in introspection. Made for joy, we settle for pleasure. Made for justice, we clamour for vengeance. Made for relationship, we insist on our own way. Made for beauty, we are satisfied with sentiment. But new creation has already begun. The sun has begun to rise. Christians are called to leave behind, in the tomb of Jesus Christ, all that belongs to the brokenness and incompleteness of the present world.
It is time, in the power of the Spirit, to take up our proper role, our fully human role, as agents, heralds and stewards of the new day that is dawning. That, quite simply, is what it means to be Christian, to follow Jesus Christ into the new world, God's new world, which he has thrown open before us.
- N.T. Wright, Simply Christian
links: political philosophy and theology (21 nov 08), justice and justification (23 feb 09), justice and love (23 mar 09)
Tuesday 10 February 2009
Judeo-Christianity vs Judaism
over the weekend, york cu hosted two messianic Jews - stephen pacht (the uk director of Jews for Jesus) and yoel ben david (a missionary with Jews for Jesus). we had seminars on messianic prophecies, the Jewish roots of Christianity and Jewish objections to Jesus. stephen also spoke on Christ in the Passover at york evangelical church on sun.
for me personally, it was a real blessing to talk to stephen and yoel and find out more about the Jewish roots of Christianity.
Judeo-Christianity is not a misnomer. it is genuine Christianity. Jesus was a Jew, as were all the apostles and most of the early church. to this end, Jews should not reject Judeo-Christianity (in favour of Judaism) because it is not Jewish enough. equally, Gentiles should not reject Judeo-Christianity (in favour of the prosperity gospel) because it is too Jewish. indeed, the only way to understand the New Covenant is to understand it as the fulfillment of the Old Covenant (ie. the Jewish Scriptures).
Christ's Sacrifice Once for All
"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming - not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshippers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." - Hebrews 10:1-4 (NIV)
it is a misconception that being under the Old Covenant is about being saved by keeping the law, while being under the New Covenant is about being saved by grace through faith. the truth is, being under the Old Covenant is about being saved by grace through faith (made complete by works of the law), while being under the New Covenant is about being saved by grace through faith (made complete by works).
"Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. Then I said, 'Here I am - it is written about me in the scroll - I have come to do your will, O God.'"
"First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them" (although the law required them to be made). Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifices of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." - Hebrews 10:5-10 (NIV)
to be sure, believers under the Old Covenant kept the law. however, the law never had the power to save. rather, the law was always intended to point towards (and eventually give way to) the New Covenant in Christ. in other words, believers under the Old Covenant kept the law not because the law had the power to save, but because keeping the law demonstrated their faith in the promises of God.
"But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons." - Galatians 4:4-5 (NIV)
Jews and Gentiles
"All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares." - Romans 2:12-16 (NIV)
keeping the law is not the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers, but the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles. it just so happened that under the Old Covenant, the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles was the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers - because salvation had not yet come to the Gentiles. under the Old Covenant, Gentiles became spiritual Jews by becoming physical Jews (even as not all physical Jews were spiritual Jews).
under the New Covenant, the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles is no longer the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers - because salvation has now come to the Gentiles. under the New Covenant, Gentiles become spiritual Jews by faith in Christ alone, apart from becoming physical Jews.
to sum up, the difference between Judeo-Christianity and Judaism is that in Judeo-Christianity, the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles is no longer the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers, but a matter of conscience between Jewish believers and Gentile believers; in Judaism, the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles remains the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers.
for me personally, it was a real blessing to talk to stephen and yoel and find out more about the Jewish roots of Christianity.
Judeo-Christianity is not a misnomer. it is genuine Christianity. Jesus was a Jew, as were all the apostles and most of the early church. to this end, Jews should not reject Judeo-Christianity (in favour of Judaism) because it is not Jewish enough. equally, Gentiles should not reject Judeo-Christianity (in favour of the prosperity gospel) because it is too Jewish. indeed, the only way to understand the New Covenant is to understand it as the fulfillment of the Old Covenant (ie. the Jewish Scriptures).
Christ's Sacrifice Once for All
"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming - not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshippers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." - Hebrews 10:1-4 (NIV)
it is a misconception that being under the Old Covenant is about being saved by keeping the law, while being under the New Covenant is about being saved by grace through faith. the truth is, being under the Old Covenant is about being saved by grace through faith (made complete by works of the law), while being under the New Covenant is about being saved by grace through faith (made complete by works).
"Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. Then I said, 'Here I am - it is written about me in the scroll - I have come to do your will, O God.'"
"First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them" (although the law required them to be made). Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifices of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." - Hebrews 10:5-10 (NIV)
to be sure, believers under the Old Covenant kept the law. however, the law never had the power to save. rather, the law was always intended to point towards (and eventually give way to) the New Covenant in Christ. in other words, believers under the Old Covenant kept the law not because the law had the power to save, but because keeping the law demonstrated their faith in the promises of God.
"But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons." - Galatians 4:4-5 (NIV)
Jews and Gentiles
"All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares." - Romans 2:12-16 (NIV)
keeping the law is not the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers, but the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles. it just so happened that under the Old Covenant, the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles was the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers - because salvation had not yet come to the Gentiles. under the Old Covenant, Gentiles became spiritual Jews by becoming physical Jews (even as not all physical Jews were spiritual Jews).
under the New Covenant, the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles is no longer the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers - because salvation has now come to the Gentiles. under the New Covenant, Gentiles become spiritual Jews by faith in Christ alone, apart from becoming physical Jews.
to sum up, the difference between Judeo-Christianity and Judaism is that in Judeo-Christianity, the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles is no longer the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers, but a matter of conscience between Jewish believers and Gentile believers; in Judaism, the ethnic boundary between Jews and Gentiles remains the moral boundary between believers and unbelievers.
Monday 9 February 2009
colluding with vs conquering
"The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."" - Genesis 2:15-17 (NIV)
"The truly righteous man attains life, but he who pursues evil goes to his death." - Proverbs 11:19 (NIV)
"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." - Romans 6:23 (NIV)
"This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Saviour, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." - 2 Timothy 1:9b-10 (NIV)
"Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." - Revelation 20:11-15 (NIV)
death is always and everywhere an evil. indeed, 'life - all life - is meaningful and good, and evil distorts and disrupts the good and cries out to be set right' (Westerholm, Understanding Paul). to this end, Christian hope is not about going to heaven when we die, but about 'the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting' (The Apostles' Creed).
going to heaven when we die is merely colluding with the grave. this is patently unbiblical. on the other hand, eternal life in a new heaven and a new earth is conquering the grave. this is what we are living (and dying) for!
life after life after death
Paul and John, Jesus himself, and pretty well all the great Christian teachers of the first two centuries, stress their belief in resurrection. 'Resurrection' does not mean 'going to heaven when you die'. It isn't about 'life after death'. It's about 'life after life after death'. You die; you go to be 'with Christ' ('life after death'), but your body remains dead. Describing where and what you are in that interim period is difficult, and the New Testament writers mostly don't try. Call it 'heaven' if you like, but don't imagine it's the end of all things. What is promised after that interim period is a new bodily life within God's new world ('life after life after death').
I am constantly amazed that many contemporary Christians find this confusing. It was second nature to the early church and to many subsequent Christian generations. It was what they believed and taught. If we have grown up believing and teaching something else, it's time we rubbed our eyes and read our texts again. God's plan is not to abandon this world, the world of which he said that it was 'very good'. He intends to remake it. And when he does, he will raise all his people to new bodily life to live in it. That is the promise of the Christian gospel.
- N.T. Wright, Simply Christian
link: more on colluding with vs conquering (25 mar 09)
"The truly righteous man attains life, but he who pursues evil goes to his death." - Proverbs 11:19 (NIV)
"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." - Romans 6:23 (NIV)
"This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Saviour, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." - 2 Timothy 1:9b-10 (NIV)
"Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." - Revelation 20:11-15 (NIV)
death is always and everywhere an evil. indeed, 'life - all life - is meaningful and good, and evil distorts and disrupts the good and cries out to be set right' (Westerholm, Understanding Paul). to this end, Christian hope is not about going to heaven when we die, but about 'the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting' (The Apostles' Creed).
going to heaven when we die is merely colluding with the grave. this is patently unbiblical. on the other hand, eternal life in a new heaven and a new earth is conquering the grave. this is what we are living (and dying) for!
life after life after death
Paul and John, Jesus himself, and pretty well all the great Christian teachers of the first two centuries, stress their belief in resurrection. 'Resurrection' does not mean 'going to heaven when you die'. It isn't about 'life after death'. It's about 'life after life after death'. You die; you go to be 'with Christ' ('life after death'), but your body remains dead. Describing where and what you are in that interim period is difficult, and the New Testament writers mostly don't try. Call it 'heaven' if you like, but don't imagine it's the end of all things. What is promised after that interim period is a new bodily life within God's new world ('life after life after death').
I am constantly amazed that many contemporary Christians find this confusing. It was second nature to the early church and to many subsequent Christian generations. It was what they believed and taught. If we have grown up believing and teaching something else, it's time we rubbed our eyes and read our texts again. God's plan is not to abandon this world, the world of which he said that it was 'very good'. He intends to remake it. And when he does, he will raise all his people to new bodily life to live in it. That is the promise of the Christian gospel.
- N.T. Wright, Simply Christian
link: more on colluding with vs conquering (25 mar 09)
Sunday 8 February 2009
permitting vs prescribing
There is general agreement among Christians that there are times when a Christian should engage in civil disobedience. The real problem is where to draw the line, and there are two positions on this. One view holds that government should be disobeyed when it promulgates a law that is contrary to the Word of God. The other view contends that government should be disobeyed only when it commands the Christian to do evil...
We should legally protest unjust laws, but we should not disobey them. It is one thing for a government to allow others to do evil, but it is another thing for it to force an individual to do evil. Only in the latter case is civil disobedience justified.
- Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics
let's say that in an election, candidate A is pro-choice and opposes an unjust war, while candidate B is pro-life and supports an unjust war. how then shall we vote?
all other things being equal, we should vote for candidate A.
in being pro-choice, candidate A is permitting evil. nevertheless, it is possible to live under candidate A without sinning. on the other hand, in supporting an unjust war, candidate B is prescribing evil. to this end, it is not possible to live under candidate B without sinning.
therefore, voting for candidate A is the greater good (in a graded absolutist sense, not in a utilitarian sense).
link: more on permitting vs prescribing (18 mar 09)
We should legally protest unjust laws, but we should not disobey them. It is one thing for a government to allow others to do evil, but it is another thing for it to force an individual to do evil. Only in the latter case is civil disobedience justified.
- Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics
let's say that in an election, candidate A is pro-choice and opposes an unjust war, while candidate B is pro-life and supports an unjust war. how then shall we vote?
all other things being equal, we should vote for candidate A.
in being pro-choice, candidate A is permitting evil. nevertheless, it is possible to live under candidate A without sinning. on the other hand, in supporting an unjust war, candidate B is prescribing evil. to this end, it is not possible to live under candidate B without sinning.
therefore, voting for candidate A is the greater good (in a graded absolutist sense, not in a utilitarian sense).
link: more on permitting vs prescribing (18 mar 09)
Saturday 7 February 2009
transposition
The brutal man never can by analysis find anything but lust in love... physiology never can find anything in thought except twitchings of the grey matter... [the materialist] is therefore, as regards the matter in hand, in the position of an animal.
You will have noticed that most dogs cannot understand pointing. You point to a bit of food on the floor: the dog, instead of looking at the floor, sniffs at your finger. A finger is a finger to him, and that is all...
As long as this deliberate refusal to understand things from above, even where such understanding is possible, continues, it is idle to talk of any final victory over materialism. The critique of every experience from below... will always have the same plausibility. There will always be evidence, and every month fresh evidence, to show that religion is only psychological, justice only self-protection, politics only economics, love only lust, and thought itself only cerebral biochemistry.
- C.S. Lewis, Transposition in The Weight of Glory (quoted by John Piper, When I Don't Desire God)
You will have noticed that most dogs cannot understand pointing. You point to a bit of food on the floor: the dog, instead of looking at the floor, sniffs at your finger. A finger is a finger to him, and that is all...
As long as this deliberate refusal to understand things from above, even where such understanding is possible, continues, it is idle to talk of any final victory over materialism. The critique of every experience from below... will always have the same plausibility. There will always be evidence, and every month fresh evidence, to show that religion is only psychological, justice only self-protection, politics only economics, love only lust, and thought itself only cerebral biochemistry.
- C.S. Lewis, Transposition in The Weight of Glory (quoted by John Piper, When I Don't Desire God)
Friday 6 February 2009
how then shall we pray?
Most people, before their prayers are soaked in Scripture, simply bring their natural desires to God. In other words, they pray the way an unbeliever would pray who is convinced that God might give him what he wants: health, a better job, safe journeys, a prosperous portfolio, successful children, plenty of food, a happy marriage, a car that works, a comfortable retirement, etc.
None of these is evil. They're just natural. You don't have to be born again to want any of these. Desiring them - even from God - is no evidence of saving faith. So if these are all you pray for, there is a deep problem. Your desires have not yet been changed to put the glory of Christ at the centre.
But when you saturate your mind with the Christ-exalting Word of God and turn it into prayer, your desires and your prayers become spiritual. That is, they are shaped by the Holy Spirit into God-centred, Christ-exalting prayers. The glory of Christ, and the name of God, and the spiritual well-being of people, and the delight you have in knowing Jesus - these become your dominant concerns and your constant requests. You still pray for health and marriage and job and journeys, but now what you want to happen is that, in all these, Christ will be exalted.
This changes the pattern and passion of your prayers. Your prayer for a journey is not merely that it be safe, but that all along the way your joy would be in God and that he would shine through you. Your prayer for your job is not merely that it be stable and peaceful and prosperous, but that it truly serves the needs of society and that in all your labour and all your relationships your joy in Christ and your love for people would make a name for Jesus.
- John Piper, When I Don't Desire God
None of these is evil. They're just natural. You don't have to be born again to want any of these. Desiring them - even from God - is no evidence of saving faith. So if these are all you pray for, there is a deep problem. Your desires have not yet been changed to put the glory of Christ at the centre.
But when you saturate your mind with the Christ-exalting Word of God and turn it into prayer, your desires and your prayers become spiritual. That is, they are shaped by the Holy Spirit into God-centred, Christ-exalting prayers. The glory of Christ, and the name of God, and the spiritual well-being of people, and the delight you have in knowing Jesus - these become your dominant concerns and your constant requests. You still pray for health and marriage and job and journeys, but now what you want to happen is that, in all these, Christ will be exalted.
This changes the pattern and passion of your prayers. Your prayer for a journey is not merely that it be safe, but that all along the way your joy would be in God and that he would shine through you. Your prayer for your job is not merely that it be stable and peaceful and prosperous, but that it truly serves the needs of society and that in all your labour and all your relationships your joy in Christ and your love for people would make a name for Jesus.
- John Piper, When I Don't Desire God
Thursday 5 February 2009
trust and obey
"Why do I put myself in jeopardy and take my life in my hands? Though he slay me, yet will I hope in him; I will surely defend my ways to his face. Indeed, this will turn out for my deliverance, for no godless man would dare come before him!" - Job 13:14-16 (NIV)
"The LORD is my light and my salvation - whom shall I fear? The LORD is the stronghold of my life - of whom shall I be afraid? When evil men advance against me to devour my flesh, when my enemies and my foes attack me, they will stumble and fall. Though an army besiege me, my heart will not fear; though war break out against me, even then will I be confident." - Psalm 27:1-3 (NIV)
"Though the fig tree does not bud and there are no grapes on the vines, though the olive crop fails and the fields produce no food, though there are no sheep in the pen and no cattle in the stalls, yet I will rejoice in the LORD, I will be joyful in God my Saviour." - Habakkuk 3:17-18 (NIV)
When this world totally fails, the ground for joy remains. God. Therefore, surely every prayer for life and health and home and family and job and ministry in this world is secondary. And the great purpose of prayer is to ask that - in and through all his gifts - God would be our joy.
- John Piper, When I Don't Desire God
it would be easy to trust and obey a god of health, wealth and prosperity. but God is not a god of health, wealth and prosperity.
[of course, there is nothing inherently evil about health, wealth and prosperity. in fact, they are good gifts from God which should be received with thanksgiving - if God so chooses to bless us with them. however, our faith in God does not depend on them.]
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men." - Romans 14:17-18 (NIV)
"May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit." - Romans 15:13 (NIV)
"Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus." - Philippians 4:4-7 (NIV)
"You will go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and hills will burst into song before you, and all the trees of the field will clap their hands. Instead of the thornbush will grow the pine tree, and instead of briers the myrtle will grow. This will be for the LORD's renown, for an everlasting sign, which will not be destroyed." - Isaiah 55:12-13 (NIV)
it is no coincidence that joy and peace are the second and third manifestations of the fruit of the Spirit (the first is love). indeed, love, joy and peace - and for that matter, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control - are inextricably linked.
how then shall we fight for joy?
give them all to Jesus
Are you tired of chasing pretty rainbows?
Are you tired of spinning round and round?
Wrap up all the shattered dreams of your life
At the feet of Jesus lay them down
Give them all, give them all, give them all to Jesus
Shattered dreams, wounded hearts, broken toys
Give them all, give them all, give them all to Jesus
And He will turn your sorrow into joy
He never said you'd only see sunshine
He never said there'd be no rain
He only promised a heart full of singing
At the very things that once brought pain
Give them all, give them all, give them all to Jesus
Shattered dreams, wounded hearts, broken toys
Give them all, give them all, give them all to Jesus
And He will turn your sorrow into joy
"But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." - Matthew 6:33-34 (NIV)
i have stuck a copy of this passage on the wall above my bedside table so that i can be reminded of it every night before i go to sleep. if God provides for the birds of the air and the lilies of the field, how much more will He provide for us - if we would seek first His kingdom and His righteousness!
we shall fight for joy by living one day at a time. we shall fight for joy by living in the present. we shall fight for joy by trusting and obeying, living according to the will of God.
trust and obey
When we walk with the Lord
In the light of His word
What a glory He sheds on our way
While we do His good will
He abides with us still
And with all who will trust and obey
Trust and obey
For there's no other way
To be happy in Jesus
But to trust and obey
"The LORD is my light and my salvation - whom shall I fear? The LORD is the stronghold of my life - of whom shall I be afraid? When evil men advance against me to devour my flesh, when my enemies and my foes attack me, they will stumble and fall. Though an army besiege me, my heart will not fear; though war break out against me, even then will I be confident." - Psalm 27:1-3 (NIV)
"Though the fig tree does not bud and there are no grapes on the vines, though the olive crop fails and the fields produce no food, though there are no sheep in the pen and no cattle in the stalls, yet I will rejoice in the LORD, I will be joyful in God my Saviour." - Habakkuk 3:17-18 (NIV)
When this world totally fails, the ground for joy remains. God. Therefore, surely every prayer for life and health and home and family and job and ministry in this world is secondary. And the great purpose of prayer is to ask that - in and through all his gifts - God would be our joy.
- John Piper, When I Don't Desire God
it would be easy to trust and obey a god of health, wealth and prosperity. but God is not a god of health, wealth and prosperity.
[of course, there is nothing inherently evil about health, wealth and prosperity. in fact, they are good gifts from God which should be received with thanksgiving - if God so chooses to bless us with them. however, our faith in God does not depend on them.]
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men." - Romans 14:17-18 (NIV)
"May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit." - Romans 15:13 (NIV)
"Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus." - Philippians 4:4-7 (NIV)
"You will go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and hills will burst into song before you, and all the trees of the field will clap their hands. Instead of the thornbush will grow the pine tree, and instead of briers the myrtle will grow. This will be for the LORD's renown, for an everlasting sign, which will not be destroyed." - Isaiah 55:12-13 (NIV)
it is no coincidence that joy and peace are the second and third manifestations of the fruit of the Spirit (the first is love). indeed, love, joy and peace - and for that matter, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control - are inextricably linked.
how then shall we fight for joy?
give them all to Jesus
Are you tired of chasing pretty rainbows?
Are you tired of spinning round and round?
Wrap up all the shattered dreams of your life
At the feet of Jesus lay them down
Give them all, give them all, give them all to Jesus
Shattered dreams, wounded hearts, broken toys
Give them all, give them all, give them all to Jesus
And He will turn your sorrow into joy
He never said you'd only see sunshine
He never said there'd be no rain
He only promised a heart full of singing
At the very things that once brought pain
Give them all, give them all, give them all to Jesus
Shattered dreams, wounded hearts, broken toys
Give them all, give them all, give them all to Jesus
And He will turn your sorrow into joy
"But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." - Matthew 6:33-34 (NIV)
i have stuck a copy of this passage on the wall above my bedside table so that i can be reminded of it every night before i go to sleep. if God provides for the birds of the air and the lilies of the field, how much more will He provide for us - if we would seek first His kingdom and His righteousness!
we shall fight for joy by living one day at a time. we shall fight for joy by living in the present. we shall fight for joy by trusting and obeying, living according to the will of God.
trust and obey
When we walk with the Lord
In the light of His word
What a glory He sheds on our way
While we do His good will
He abides with us still
And with all who will trust and obey
Trust and obey
For there's no other way
To be happy in Jesus
But to trust and obey
Wednesday 4 February 2009
more on the best possible world
According to the Scriptures, God is eternal and infinite in all His attributes. As the intelligent all-powerful God, He created the universe in all its complexities. In creating the world He set the stage for the activities of human beings. But how could God predict what will happen when choice is left to His creatures? According to the Scriptures God has knowledge of everything. His understanding of all events is unsearchable (Isa. 40:28). Christ possesses "all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (Col. 2:3). Having knowledge of all things actual or possible, God in creating the world knew fully all that would follow from His creation.
The Scriptures also reveal that God has a plan in which He has determined what the future will hold. Having knowledge of all possible as well as all actual future events, God knows in advance any plans, regardless of how detailed they are, and He is able to predict with absolute accuracy not only what He Himself will do but also what will follow from natural law and human choices. But how can God know the future without controlling it? He can predict in advance the choices human beings will make because He has perfect knowledge of what each individual will know and experience.
The supreme example of this is the death of Christ on which the whole plan of redemption hinged. God did not have to be on the sidelines and worry whether Pilate would order the execution of Christ or whether the soldiers would carry out the orders to crucify Him. God had absolute certainty from His omniscience that this would be the case. At the same time God is not responsible for the immoral acts of human beings, because they choose freely without any sense of compulsion from a higher being. Accordingly, every one of the hundreds of prophecies that have been fulfilled exactly as the Bible predicted are illustrations of the fact that God can view as certain all future events that are determined by humankind.
But how can we explain life's tragic situations and acts? Since God is perfect, He would not adopt any plan if there were a better one. Humanly speaking, God might have determined any one of several equally good plans. In one plan Mr. Black is saved, and in the other plan Mr. Brown is saved. Because of His perfection, God in keeping with His character chose the best plan - there could be none better. While we in our human limitations cannot understand tragedies and events in history that seem so contrary to what God would wish, we can only conclude that if we had the full picture and understood everything, we would choose to do exactly what God did.
A chief dispatcher of a railroad may publish a timetable. He may determine a schedule for freight times; he can also determine a schedule for passenger trains. The schedule is published, and the trains run as scheduled. If the dispatcher were omniscient, he would know in advance how many passengers would board each train. He would know whether the trains would run as scheduled. Yet he would not force anyone to board the trains. There would be certainty without compulsion. In a similar way, human choice from God's point of view can be determined without forcing anyone to do anything.
- John F. Walvoord, End Times
link: the best possible world (27 jan 09)
The Scriptures also reveal that God has a plan in which He has determined what the future will hold. Having knowledge of all possible as well as all actual future events, God knows in advance any plans, regardless of how detailed they are, and He is able to predict with absolute accuracy not only what He Himself will do but also what will follow from natural law and human choices. But how can God know the future without controlling it? He can predict in advance the choices human beings will make because He has perfect knowledge of what each individual will know and experience.
The supreme example of this is the death of Christ on which the whole plan of redemption hinged. God did not have to be on the sidelines and worry whether Pilate would order the execution of Christ or whether the soldiers would carry out the orders to crucify Him. God had absolute certainty from His omniscience that this would be the case. At the same time God is not responsible for the immoral acts of human beings, because they choose freely without any sense of compulsion from a higher being. Accordingly, every one of the hundreds of prophecies that have been fulfilled exactly as the Bible predicted are illustrations of the fact that God can view as certain all future events that are determined by humankind.
But how can we explain life's tragic situations and acts? Since God is perfect, He would not adopt any plan if there were a better one. Humanly speaking, God might have determined any one of several equally good plans. In one plan Mr. Black is saved, and in the other plan Mr. Brown is saved. Because of His perfection, God in keeping with His character chose the best plan - there could be none better. While we in our human limitations cannot understand tragedies and events in history that seem so contrary to what God would wish, we can only conclude that if we had the full picture and understood everything, we would choose to do exactly what God did.
A chief dispatcher of a railroad may publish a timetable. He may determine a schedule for freight times; he can also determine a schedule for passenger trains. The schedule is published, and the trains run as scheduled. If the dispatcher were omniscient, he would know in advance how many passengers would board each train. He would know whether the trains would run as scheduled. Yet he would not force anyone to board the trains. There would be certainty without compulsion. In a similar way, human choice from God's point of view can be determined without forcing anyone to do anything.
- John F. Walvoord, End Times
link: the best possible world (27 jan 09)
Tuesday 3 February 2009
the heart of the matter is the matter of the heart
"The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? "I the LORD search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve."" - Jeremiah 17:9-10 (NIV)
"Search me, O God, and know my heart; test me and know my anxious thoughts. See if there is any offensive way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting." - Psalm 139:23-24 (NIV)
"Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life." - Proverbs 4:23 (NIV)
"Search me, O God, and know my heart; test me and know my anxious thoughts. See if there is any offensive way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting." - Psalm 139:23-24 (NIV)
"Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life." - Proverbs 4:23 (NIV)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)