July 06, 2004
Overwhelmed and Aggravated
Ok, I have a ton of reading to do, MOST of which I've finished because of the storm that ran through here a little while ago that nocked the phone lines out. I still have a bunch to do so I don't get behind.
AND I'm aggravated at BlogSpot. I'm really tired of not being able to access my blog, and I KNOW that you all are getting tired of not being able to get here. I'm looking at options -- what I THINK I'm going to do is combine this blog and my home page into one central site, and host it though 1to1 or doteasy or someone like that. I LIKE free things, but I'm learning that there's a tradeoff. If I can afford better, I'm going to do it. If anyone has any other options, let me know.
This is about all I'm going to be able to write tonight, but I should be able to do the TWiCH AND the Mark study tomorrow. Stay tuned!
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 09:35 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
How Have We Survived?
As it turns out, our parents did everything wrong! (At least, according to the "experts.") I was spanked, told "no," and even given cough surup. Can you believe, we aren't supposed to give our kids cough syrup? That's what CNN said today.
I was taught to obey and be respectful. Although my skirts might have been a tad too short, nothing hung out that shouldn't have. At 35 years old, I'm proud to say that I am a Bible-believing, God-honoring Christian. Some may find that a small accomplishment, but with what I see, it's about the best thing out there.
It's no wonder people don't bother to stay healthy. A few weeks ago, I find out that I shouldn't be out in the sunlight from 7:00 am to 10:00 am because of UVA rays that give you skin cancer (and can reach through glass). Now, I was already avoiding the sun from 10:00 am to 3:00 pm so I wouldn't get skin cancer from UVB rays. Of course, by 3:00 pm I have to stay inside so that I don't get West Nile from an infected mosquito. Then, when I thought I was safe inside my nice cozy home, they tell me "indoor pollution can be up to five times worse inside than outside.
My question to you tonight: Are you relying on the scientists or the Great Physician to help you live?
Posted by: Thanea at 08:33 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
July 04, 2004
Advisory -- Slow Posting Ahead
Monday evening, I leave for seminary. THIS time, I KNOW I'm starting a class -- I'm registered and everything. I have no idea how this will effect my posting schedule. I'm not even sure I'll have my laptop with me, as my wife is headed to Virginia to spend two weeks working on her Masters thesis (on the reaction of Virginia Baptists to the American Revolution), and she needs a mobile computer as much as I do. I have a PDA, but no wireless internet.
They have a computer lab at Southern, but I don't know if I'll be able to get on in there. I'm not even 100% sure where it is, though I'm sure I'll find out. I'd like to think that I'll stll be able to post regularly, but I honestly don't know. Just keep checking back, or subscribe to my RSS feed. If you need a good RSS reader, I've got a few recommendations:
- NewsDesk, which is what I'm using now. I like it a lot.
- BottomFeeder is a good program that I used to use all the time, and still use a little. It has a great search feature that lets you save search topics and re-search regularly.
- RssReader looks promising. I may take this one for a test drive.
The most important feature of all these programs is the price -- they're free. And they check all your RSS feeds automatically, so you don't have to keep hitting sites, only to find out that it hasn't been updated yet.
Of course, you could also subscribe through the Bloglines link over there on the left, as many of you have done. It's just as easy as an RSS reader, and you don't have to install any software. And it's just as free!!
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 04:29 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Happy Fourth of July!
but we trust in the name of the LORD our God. They collapse and fall,
but we rise and stand upright.
(Psalms 20:7-8 ESV)
I think that verse, more than any other, should be how Christians feel about their country -- no matter where they live. Yes, we should try to make things better for everyone. Yes, we should be responsible stewards of creation. But our ultimate trust should be in God alone. Reminds me of a song:
Were brought before a tyrants throne
And they were told that he would spare their lives
If they would renounce the name of Christ.
But one by one they chose to die
The Son of God they would not deny
Like a great angelic choir sings
I can almost hear their voices ring.
CHOURS:
I pledge allegiance to the Lamb
With all my strengh
With all I am
I will seek to honor His command
I pledge allegiance to the Lamb.
Now the years have come and the years have gone
But the cause of Jesus still goes on
And now our time has come to count the cost
To reject this world, and embrace the cross
And one by one let us live our lives
For the One who died to give us life.
Till the trumpet sounds on the final day
Let us proudly stand and boldly say
REPEAT CHORUS:
To the Lamb of God who bore my pain
Who took my place, Who wore my shame.
I will seek to honor His commands
I pledge allegiance to the Lamb.
Parableman has a great post on this topic today. And Patriot Paradox has a post that will get your blood boiling.
In between burgers and hot dogs, think about what this country means to you -- and how much more the Kingdom of God should mean to you.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 03:15 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
July 03, 2004
Celebrating the Underblogs!!
Head on over here and let people know about all those underrated blogs out there. I think this is a great idea -- of course, I'm about as unknown as they come (except for the 10 people who read me regularly -- thankyou thankyou thankyou!). Let's get some recognition for some great blogs -- and go through the list on the site, maybe you'll find a new favorite!!
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:39 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Bush's Mass Mailing List
Not usually a political blogger, but I found this story over at Christianity Today. Seems the President is getting some addresses and phone numbers for a mass mailing/telemarketing program.
And he's getting them for free.
The President is asking supporters to send him their church directories. This is going to give him a wealth of information -- names and addresses especially, but also phone numbers and possibly some demographic information (age, number of kids, etc.).
Marketers pay a LOT of money for these lists; in fact, these lists are one of the biggest expenses involved in any marketing campaign. Bush is going to get them for free.
Needless to say, Bush opponents are up in arms. I can understand why -- the Bush campaign is getting thousands of dollars worth of marketing information for free. I'd think that this is streatching the campaign rules a little bit. Bush had better be careful here.
Other things the Bush campaign is asking are for volunteers to encourage their churches to hold voter registration rallies, recruit churchmembers for the campaign, and put together voter information packages. Some church/state separationists are upset about these things as well.
I don't like the church directories being given to the campaign. I have no problem with any of the other things Bush is doing; after all, the Democrats have been doing it for years, with Rev. Jesse Jackson at the head of the campaign. Part of the problem is that people don't think of Jackson as a minister -- he's first and foremost a politician. Part of the problem is that church/state separatists tend to be more toward the liberal side of the spectrum, and they don't notice the beam in their own eye.
I'm not sure how I feel about this plan. I can see that it's very efficient, politically, for the campaign. I can see, however, that it could cause some problems in churches that are politically diverse. It can cause concern about tax-exempt statuses for many churches. And I'm not sure it's going to gain the President many new voters (though I could be wrong here).
I know that if my church held a voter registration drive, I'd participate. I know that if my church held a campaign dinner, or if someone asked me to volunteer on the campaign, I'd probably say no. I support President Bush, but I don't want him to think that he's getting a free ride from Christians simply because he's a Republican. He needs to make sure he doesn't forget about us two years after re-election, as has seemed to be the case.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:54 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
July 01, 2004
The NAE and Civic Engagement
I promised this yesterday, but I've been mulling over what I want to say. Some of the things in the document, I don't agree with. Some things in the document, conservatives won't agree with. But I think that there is a lot that is worthwhile here, no matter what nation you live in.
One thing to remember is that this document encompasses all evangelicals -- or is meant to. Not all evangelicals are politically conservative, and their influence can be seen in the document.
One thing that the document makes clear is that "disengagement is not an option". We have to remain engaged with our nation as much as we can be, to try to make the changes to our society that government can make. This is something that I think people have misunderstood about things that I have said -- I don't believe that we should just go away and let the nation go; we have to be engaged. The isue that I have is that many Christians seem to think that if we can get the politics straightened out, everything will be OK. The government cannot fix everything, and we shouldn't expect it to.
One thing that conservatives will disagree on is the ammount of government. The NAE does not advocate a small government; in fact, it sees a role for government in welfare (and welfare reform), protection of the sanctity of life, international peacemaking, and many other areas. It also calls for improved access to health care for all citizens.
The Bible makes it clear that God cares a great deal about the wellbeing of marriage, the family, the sanctity of human life, justice for the poor, care for creation, peace, freedom, and racial justice. While individual persons and organizations may rightly concentrate on one or two issues, faithful evangelical civic engagement must champion a biblically balanced agenda.In other words, don't ignore the poor. Don't ignore environmental issues. Don't ignore racism. If we are truely going to bring a Christian worldview to our politics, we have to make sure that it is consistant.
We will differ with other Christians and with non-Christians over the best policies. Thus we must practice humility and cooperation to achieve modest and attainable goals for the good of society. We must take care to employ the language of civility and to avoid demonizing those with whom we disagree. Because political work requires persuasion and cooperation with those who do not share our Christian commitment, we must offer a reasoned and easy-to-grasp defense of our goals.In other words, no name-calling, from either side.
I especially like this quote:
Christians engaged in political activity must maintain their integrity and keep their biblical values intact. While they may frequently settle for "half-a-loaf," they must never compromise principle by engaging in unethical behavior or endorsing or fostering sin. Evangelicals should join political parties and fully express their biblical values. In doing so, they must be careful not to equate Christian faith with partisan politics.The emphasis there, of course, is mine. The whole Republican=Christian thing is not only untrue, it's unbiblical, as is Christian=Republican. Party politics are not tied to faith in Christ, as I tried to illustrate elsewhere. All we can do, and what we need to do, is make sure that our political views reflect our Christian beliefs. That may involve supporting (gasp) a Democrat. Or an Independant. Or Libertarian, or Constitutional, or Green. Political parties will take us for granted, unless we make sure they know we vote issues, not party.
There is a large section on protecting liberty of conscience, which should relieve the folks who think we're a bunch of Reconstructionists. Then again, they probably won't listen to us at all.
Because human beings are responsible to God, these guarantees are crucial to the exercise of their Godgiven freedom. As God allows the wheat and tares to grow together until the harvest, and as God sends the rain on the just and on the unjust, so those who obey and those who disobey God coexist in society and share in its blessings (Matt. 5:45; 13:24-30). This "gospel pluralism" is foundational to the religious liberty of all.THIS is where our call to evangelism comes into play. Government MUST allow all faiths to practice their beliefs, including those faiths who are called to proseletyze. We must be about the Lord's business, and government cannot interfere. At the same time, we must realize that other faiths are allowed to exist in our society, and not strive for laws that restrict their practice.
We commit ourselves to work for laws that protect and foster family life, and against government attempts to interfere with the integrity of the family. We also oppose innovations such as same-sex "marriage." We will work for measures that strengthen the economic viability of marriages and families, especially among the poor. We likewise commit ourselves to work within the church and society to strengthen marriages, to reduce the rate of divorce, and to prepare young adults for healthy family life.I'm curious about how many people who are in favor of the Marriage Ammendment are divorced. Do they not realize that divorce is interfering with the integrity of the institution of marriage as much as the whole 'same-sex marriage' issue? There are more heterosexuals who get divorced every day than there are homosexuals who want to get married. Consistancy. We should oppose divorce with the vigor we oppose gay marriage.
We further believe that care for the vulnerable should extend beyond our national borders. We link arms with Christians everywhere in calling on individuals, churches and governments to do more to reduce the scandal of widespread poverty in a time of abundance.Kinda puts a damper on the Constitutional Party's foreign policy platform, doesn't it?
The paper goes on to discuss government's role in providing for the poor, and taking responsibility for the economic well being of it's citizens. I think that they give government too big of a role in this area. I think that the church should be the primary provider of welfare for the poor, with the government stepping in only when they church cannot, or does not.
Restoring people to wholeness means that public social welfare must aim to restore people to self-sufficiency. While basic standards of support must be put in place to provide for those who cannot care for their families and themselves, incentives and training in marketable skills must be part of any well-rounded program.Sound familiar??
They also call for sound environmental stewardship. God gave us the earth to care for -- to have dominion over, true, but also to care for and take care of.
Because clean air, pure water, and adequate resources are crucial to public health and civic order, government has an obligation to protect its citizens from the effects of environmental degradation. This involves both the urgent need to relieve human suffering
caused by bad environmental practice and the responsibility to use foresight in egulating
the use of land and resources to minimize the effects on the poor and others who are less
able to protect themselves. Because natural systems are extremely complex, human actions can have unexpected side effects. We must therefore approach our stewardship of creation with humility and caution.
I really think that this paper, if adopted with anywhere close to the language it contains in this draft, will change the way evangelicals are perceived by the secular world. It will also result in our modern fundamental brethren deciding that we have compromised. Oh, well -- they'd do that anyway.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 09:22 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
This Week in Church History
June 29, 67
Rome. The seat of all power in the known world. The heart of the Empire.
According to The People's Chronology, this is the date when the apostle Paul was beheaded.
The date itself is speculative -- the year has been thought to be anywhere from 62 to 67, and it's doubtful that we'll ever know for sure. What is important is the example of the life of Paul.
Paul was the most successful church planter in history. He planted churches throughout Asia Minor -- almost everywhere he went, a local church was born. He knew the importance of fellowship among Christians.
Paul also knew the importance of discipleship. He wrote constantly to the churches he helped to start, keeping track of their development and their problems, writing to encourage or correct. His letters were so influential, so obviously inspired by God, that even the apostle Peter included them with other inspired writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16).
Paul also pioneered the missionary movement. Not satisfied with waiting for people to come to him, Paul went out, teaching first in the synagogues, then everywhere he could -- always trying to reach people with the gospel of Christ. He was committed to the idea that the Gospel was for everyone, Jew or Gentile, male or female, slave or free. In spite of opposition, even from other apostles, he remained committed to this idea until his death.
There were many factors that led to Paul's death. He threatened many cities economically -- trade in idols and sacrifices was lucrative, and the growing Christian church threatened that. He also threatened Roman political power -- Christians could not worship the emperor as a god, which is what the Empire demanded. This new sect threatened to destabilize the Roman way of life, so it had to be stopped. The fact that not even the power of Rome could stop its growth shows that Christ's words were true: the gates of Hell would not prevail against His church.
Paul's influence on Christianity is unmistakable. It is ironic, then, that Paul had dedicated himself early on in his life to ending the influence of Christianity. The power of the presence of the risen Christ on the road to Damascus was overwhelming, though, and the results show how Christ can change anyone's life -- no matter how messed up, sinful, or confused.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 06:21 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 30, 2004
Update
Just to let you all know, my wife's surgery was moved up on us. We got a phone call at 9 this morning letting us know that we had to be at the hospital no later than 10:30. We ran around, found someone to watch our daughter, and headed out.
And sat and waited. Finally at about 12:30, she was wheeled back to surgery. By 1:50, she was out.
Apparantly, she passed the stone at some point, and we didn't know. She was really sick on Sunday, and we figure that was when it passed. The IVP that they did that showed the stone was done last Tuesday, so it had to have been in the past week.
We appreciate all the prayers and support. She'll be back to harassing me in no time!
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 05:21 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 29, 2004
Prayer Request
Tomoorow at about noon, my wife is going in for surgery to remove an 8mm kidney stone from her right kidney. I'd appreciate your prayers tomorrow, and I'll let you know how she did tomorrow evening.
I'll also be posting something about the NAE's political statement tomorrow, since I haven't had a chance to finish reading it yet. I'll be taking a pretty good bit of reading material with me to the hospital. I may also get a few things finished that I've been working on or meaning to write finished and posted.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:32 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Study of Mark: Mark 3:20-22
Now Jesus went home, and a crowd gathered so that they were not able to eat. When his family heard this they went out to restrain him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."
(Mark 3:20-22 NET)
After doing all the marvelous things that were mentioned before, Jesus goes home to Nazareth, to a warm reception from His family. They think he's nuts.
Now, under normal circumstances, I could understand this. If I had a brother, and all the sudden he started running around tapping people on the head and forgiving their sins, I'd probably wonder about the state of his mental health. We have to consider, though, one important thing.
They've been living with Mary their whole lives. Mary has told them all about Jesus, and the angel's visit, and the wise me and shepherds, and everything. She's talked about when they found Jesus in the temple, and the things He said there. So they know the story. They know who Mary and Joseph say that Jesus is supposed to be. And they STILL think that their brother Jesus is crazy. They are ignoring the obvious truth of who Christ is, choosing to believe something much easier.
People did that a lot back then. Elsewhere, we learn that there were people who believed that Jesus was John the Baptist reincarnated (Matthew 16:14). Since many people saw Jesus baptized by John the Baptist, that coulsn't possibly be true. They chose to believe that, though, rather than accept what He told them about who He was.
People still do that today. Jesus seems to be whatever the latest scholar thinks He should be -- everything from a rebel priest to a social reformer to a revolutionary leader. We tend to see Jesus as who we want Him to be, rather than who He really is. This is a result of modern scholarship deciding that there are no absolutes when it comes to the Biblical texts -- since they aren't inspired by God, we can pick and choose which passages we want to believe. If we find other texts that talk about Jesus that we like better, then we can believe in those, too. Pretty soon, we have our own, personal Jesus, who doesn't make us stop doing what we want to do, who just sits there and tells us what great people we are, and never requires anything from us as far as worship or devotion.
We are a people driven by convenience. We want to believe in God, but we don't want all the "baggage". We don't want to have to obey anyone, to follow anything resembling commandments, and don't you DARE tell us that our way might not be right.
Jesus was telling people the same thing. He was saying that the things that the Pharisees had been teaching them weren't the right path to God. He was teaching them things about the Messiah that they hadn't been taught. And when they asked who He was to teach them things like that, what authority did He have -- He showed them. Who has the kind of authority that Jesus showed over sickness? Who has the authority that He claimed when He forgave sin? Only God -- and the Jewish leaders knew that. They had two choices -- believe that He was who He said He was, and have to change centuries of beliefs, or they could believe that He was wrong, that He was guilty of blasphemy and had to be stoned. They chose the latter.
We need to think about what Jesus we believe in. Our own, personal, be whatever we want Him to be and never inconvenience us Jesus? Or the Messiah, the Son of God, the Word who, in the beginning, was with God and was God, by whom all things were created?
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:59 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Moore and Moore
Michael Moore says he's not a member of the Democratic Party, that he's an Independant. He's almost correct.
Almost.
According to this article, Moore is actually registered to vote in two states -- New York (where he is registered as a Democrat, but hasn't voted since 2001), and Michigan (where they don't ask for a party when you register). So he's NOT a Democrat there, but he's not registered as an Independant, either.
I guess technically, he's independant (small i). But, also technically, he's still a Democrat. So, again technically, he lied.
I really don't care if Moore wants to make movies like Farenheit 911. As an American, it's his right to say what he wants. I do kinda think Disney wimped out in not distributing it, but that's their right, too. I don't like it when he claims to be making documentaries, when in reality he's making propaganda pieces.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 02:18 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 28, 2004
Battling the Wrong Enemy
It's time for Thanea to climb up on her soapbox. It happens from time to time and Warren has to step in to make me step down again.
Today's rant: Trying to change the world without changing souls.
As I left for a job interview today, I was listening to Alistair Begg, one of Warren's favorite preachers. He was speaking on idols and how Satan likes to deceive us. There are idols like Baal and idols like money. But what about the idols that many wonderful, devout Christians follow: causes?
Do I support the pro-life movement? Yes!
Do I believe in same-sex marriage? No!
Do I want my daughter to see gratuitous sex and violence on television? No!
But if I want this world to truly change, I have to share Jesus with everyone I meet. The Southern Baptist Convention weighed the question of pulling children out of public schools. As a teacher in a public school for the last three years, I realize how bad it can be. I also know those kids need to see the only Light which really matters, Jesus Christ. I'm sure some of you say that I can't share with those kids. What I share is love. Love that allows me opportunities to share Christ in settings outside of the school.
Can we legislate morality? One word: Prohibition. Does that mean we should eschew politics and allow America to go to Hell in a handbasket? No! But my job is to change those people who make the decisions.
Satan wants us to fight for our causes! While we are battling for causes, Satan is claiming souls. You tell me which is more important.
When I stand before God, I don't want to be accused of fighting for causes when I should have been winning souls. May God lead me to those who need Jesus Christ. He has so far, and I have no reason to doubt He will again.
So now I ask you, which battle are you fighting?
Posted by: Thanea at 09:28 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Razormouth Is Back!!
Hit the link and head over there. I think I like the new look.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 01:29 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Happy Birthday!!
Head on over to Back of the Envelope and wish Donald a happy birthday. And then read a few of his posts -- he's got some great, thought-provoking stuff over there.
Hey, the guy reads Sluggy Freelance, so he can't be all bad!
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 12:57 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 27, 2004
The NAE and Christian Politics
I'm following this story with some anticipation -- and I'm about a week behind in reporting on it. The National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) is drafting a new document concerning the role that Christians should play in the political process. According to the Detroit News story:
It affirms a religiously based commitment to government protections for the poor, the sick and the disabled, including fair wages, health care, nutrition and education. It declares that Christians have a “sacred responsibility” to protect the environment.It also addresses consevative Christians' tendancy to play party politics:
But it also hews closely to a traditional evangelical emphasis on the importance of families, opposition to homosexual marriage, and “social evils,” such as alcohol, drugs, abortion and the use of human embryos for stem-cell research. It reaffirms a commitment to religious freedom at home and abroad.
In domestic politics, evangelicals “must guard against over-identifying Christian social goals with a single political party, lest nonbelievers think that Christian faith is essentially political in nature.”
The full document is available here. I'm going to print it out and read it tonight/tomorrow, and I'll comment more fully Tuesday evening. Right now, I'm excited. I think that this might start to emphasise to Christians that a lot of the things we want government and political parties to do , the church should be doing.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 07:28 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Back Again
Sorry about the unforseen absence -- we decided to do some remodeling and it turned into a LOT more than we thought it would be on Friday. I just now got my computer back together, so I'm going to find out what's been happening while I was up to my neck in paint and old carpet!
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 07:23 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 25, 2004
The New Wave in Christian Literature
Found this over at Christianity Today.
My own favorites:
- Chick Publications:
Opus Day: Everyone's Favorite Cartoon Penguin Invades the Secretive Catholic Organization
By J.T. Chick and Berkley Breathed, with introduction by former Opus Dei leader Alberto Rivera. - Eerdmans:
The Rembrandt Code: Understanding the Hidden Calvinist Messages in The Prodigal Son and Other Paintings.
By Hendrik van den Leeuwen - Zondervan (emergent/ys):
A New Kind of Code: The Church Needs to Read Heretical Fiction Because It's So Modernist, Man
By Brian McLaren
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 01:07 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 23, 2004
This Week in Church History
June 23, 1863
J. E. Renan publishes his Life of Christ to great controversy. The book itself was quite literary, the ideas were very contemporary, and so it was widely read.
Renen managed to take away everything that would make anyone worship Christ. Virgin birth, ressurection -- myths. Renen removed the divine from Christ and left the readers with little more than a man who was a great role model, but was misunderstood for thousands of years by people who claimed to be his followers.
Scientific method and archaeological discoveries have repudiated many of Renan's methods, and most of his findings. Unfortunately, he could easilly find a place at the side of John Domminic Crossan and the rest of the Jesus Seminar's board of scholars, as they seek to demythologize Jesus -- removing most of the biblical record in the process.
And yet, the folks at the Jesus Seminar would have us believe that their findings are new. Elaine Pagels wants us to think her writing is new and cutting edge, as well. Study history, and you'll find that we've been down both these roads before. Unorthodox Christologies come and go, but the Orthodox idea of Christ as Messiah, Son of God, God incarnate, goes on.
Birthdays
Today: Samuel Medley, a Baptist pastor and hymn writer (what else, for a man named Medley?).
Tomorrow: Theodore Beza, John Calvin's successor in Geneva.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:44 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 22, 2004
Study of Mark: Mark 3:13-19
And he went up on the mountain and called to him those whom he desired, and they came to him. And he appointed twelve (whom he also named apostles) so that they might be with him and he might send them out to preach and have authority to cast out demons. He appointed the twelve: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter); James the son of Zebedee and John the brother of James (to whom he gave the name Boanerges, that is, Sons of Thunder); Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.
(Mark 3:13-19 ESV)
The Calling of the Twelve. That's how it's listed in just about every Bible I own. It's one of the major moments in the history of Christianity -- the men who were to be the closest followers of Christ are chosen and listed for us. It's interesting that they are almost always listed in this exact order -- almost a pecking order, showing how important or famous each disciple was.
Peter, James, and John: The Big Three -- those who were closest to Christ.The travel farther with Christ into Gethsemane than the rest. They are often shown to be fairly influential. Peter, who first confessed AND first denied Christ. James, one of the first called to follow Christ, the leader of the church at Jerusalem. Along with his brother John, the disciple who would have attacked the Samaritans who did not honor Christ. John, who would be called the beloved disciple -- the only one to die of natural causes. Both called Sons of Thunder for their zeal in turning to violence.
Andrew, the first evangelist, who brought (literally) his brother Simon Peter to Christ. He stays in the background through most of the New Testament -- but without him things would have been vastly different. I can picture him listening to Peter preach, nudging a neighbor and whispering "That's my brother -- he knows what he's talking about. I was there, too, when Jesus taught". Philip, also responsible for bringing a friend (Bartholomew) to Christ, the thinker. He was more studied in Scripture than other disciples (see John 1:45). Bartholomew, also called Nathanael, who spent time with God under a fig tree, and encountered Christ. Matthew, a tax collector who nobody would ever expect to be following the Messiah, but who was worthy to write a Gospel. Thomas, the doubter, who went on to greater things for Christ. James the Lesser, possibly Matthew's brother, who was martyred for his faith. Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot -- two disciples of whom little is known outside of legend.
And Judas, the betrayer. Always last, always least in the lists.
Looking at the character of these men, we can see Christ picked men not for their ability, but their attitude. They were willing to be used. They were also very fallible. Only one was present at the crucifixion. One refused to believe the testimony that Christ had risen. All were terrified men, hiding in a borrowed room from the soldiers who were surely looking for them, on the first Ressurection Day. And all who, through the power of the Holy Spirit, were to turn the entire world upside down. We wonder sometimes why these men Christ picked were so petty at times -- as when James and John request to have the seat at Christ's right hand when He established His kingdom. Why use someone such as Peter, who swore to defend Christ to his last breath, but who denied he knew Christ before his master was even dead? Why use Thomas, who refused to believe anything but the testimony of his own eyes? And why pick Judas, when surely Christ in His omniscience knew that he would be the one to betray Him?
Christ uses imperfect vessels, so that the glory does not go to the vessel, but to Him. We are incapable, but He makes us powerful -- powerful in ways that are clearly His ways, not ours. If we learn nothing else from this passage, we can learn that Christ uses us, cracks and flaws intact, so that we can give the honor and glory to Him, and Him alone.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:17 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0322 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.0278 seconds, 25 records returned.
Page size 47 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.