GOD’S LOVE LETTER TO ME

Have you ever heard someone say that the Bible is God’s “love letter” to you?

I’m going to take that idea that we sometimes hear from the pulpit or in Christian conversation, & take a look at it from a different angle. Here goes…

Westerners tend to have a very ego-centric view of the world. We perceive, understand, & interpret information & situations based on how they affect us as individuals. We say things such as, “I want to do that again because I was able to (you fill in the blank).” Nothing necessarily wrong with that, but can you see how “Good Old Number 1” is the measure of how we value or understand something?

Whether we want to admit it or not, this way of seeing things influences how we read & understand the Bible.

With just a few exceptions, the books of the Bible were written to groups of people rather than individuals. The Old Testament books were written to a nation – the nation of Israel. The Gospels, probably with the exception of Luke, were written to groups of people. Ditto for most of the rest of the New Testament except for the Pastor Epistles & Philemon. 

Is the Bible God's love letter to me? In a very general sense we could say that it is. 

But it’s more accurate to say that it is God’s promise to the world, & it is especially experienced by those who believe it. When we apply it beyond our own individual world & allow it to shape how we relate to God & to others, we will see it as more than just a “love letter to me.”

I KNOW WHAT YOU SAID, BUT WHAT DID YOU MEAN?

I’ve never read “1984” but I understand that a big part of its appeal has to do with how words & phrases with a certain meaning or implication are used to mean something entirely different. We’re living with that today. For example, the "Affordable Care Act" actually does the opposite of what its name implies.

But, let’s bring things down to a more personal level. If we are to have a civil society, we must be able to communicate. (On a side note, you can see that one of the first things Satan did to orchestrate the fall of man was to disrupt clear communications between God & Adam & Eve. Genesis 3:1 says, Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?” Is it possible that there is a spiritual element to what we see happening in our society related to what some have called “doublespeak”?)

My hope is that each person reading this has had the wonderful experience of having someone say to you, “I love you.” Additionally, I hope that the person actually meant it & understood what it means to love someone. You see, the sentence “I love you” can mean a lot of things to a lot of people; this unfortunately is especially true about the one who has just said it & the one who just heard it.

Without going into all the various self-centered meanings that might be behind such a declaration of affection, let’s just look at how I have come to understand the meaning of love during my nearly 44 years of walking with Christ.

First, love does not focus on the feelings of the one who claims to love someone. In fact, while romantic love does involve emotions, emotions tend to play a very small part of love because they are so fickle & changeable. The emotions that need to be prioritized are those of the one who is loved, not the one who claims to love.

Second, love does not prioritize the benefits to the one who says “I love you.” Instead, it seeks the greatest ultimate good of its object, even if that means personal sacrifice for the one who loves another. It’s not about “what you do for me,” but how my love for you can bring about the best for you.

Third, love grows in its reflection of how God describes it in such passages as I Corinthians 13 & in how it is reflected in the life of Jesus.

So, the next time you hear someone say “I love you,” ask yourself what they mean. Don’t get 1984ed.

SHINING THE LIGHT ON “SHAME HISTORY”

Dinesh D’Souza is an American of Asian Indian descent. He has seen life from both sides – as a child & youth in India, & as a university student & working adult in America. D’Souza is an excellent researcher & writer – widely read, open minded, & intellectually honest.

A couple of years ago he made a video called America: Imagine a World Without Her, based on his book of the same name. Although there are many praiseworthy things about the video, the best one is that it describes in simple fashion what can be called the “shame history” of the United States. This history, by the way, is commonly taught in many of the educational institutions of our beloved nation.

This shame history argues a number of things. One is that American was enlarged by stealing vast amounts of land from Mexico. Another is that it was enriched by slavery. An additional one is that native Americans were intentionally & systematically wiped out by the European settlers. Finally, it argues that America continues to be enriched thru wars of conquest.

After summarizing these & interviewing a number of proponents of these “shame” views of American history, D’Souza shows in very simple terms why these ideas are wrong & inaccurate.

I say all these things to whet your appetite for this video. My motive is to encourage you to inform yourself for those times when someone will to propagandize you or someone you love with this shame history.

Tonight, make some popcorn. Get a pen & paper, or your laptop to take notes. Then spend about 90 minutes re-discovering the real America that generations of our countrymen have loved & appreciated. Then you can shine some light on shame history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcyNXxrfJIQ

THE CHURCH HAS THE ANSWER TO POVERTY

Jayakumar Christian, an Asian Indian theologian, surveyed documents issued by various Evangelical conferences and congresses throughout the last half of 20^th century.

According to his summary, poverty:

·       Is the marring of the image of God in the poor;

·       Is perpetuated by flawed structures in society and societal institutions;

·       Distorts the truth about God and man, and instead advances falsehood about both;

·       Results from a of lack of compassion and love toward the poor;

·       Has both micro (local) and macro (worldwide) dimensions;

·       Is rooted in the fallen-ness of cultures, and is perpetuated through human cultures;

·       Is actively maintained and spread by principalities and powers;

·       Has political ramifications that cannot be ignored;

·       Is an issue of power and relationships among the poor and between the poor and non-poor;

·       Is a result of humanity’s fall as recorded in Scripture; this is reflected and implied in all aspects of poverty.

This being the case, poverty can best be addressed thru the local church & its ministries. A local congregation that is healthy & physically located in the community has the resources to deal directly with many of the aspects of poverty that Jakakumar Christian mentioned.

The local church, functioning in its God-given role, works to restore the image of God in man by proclaiming and living out the truth about God and man. The Great Commission mandates this proclamation, in addition to making disciples who fully follow Christ’s teaching. As a redemptive community living in obedience to the Great Commandments, the local church brings the grace of God into man’s and culture’s fallen condition. Through prayer, worship, mutual submission, and the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit it confronts the principalities and powers that are at work in and through poverty. The local congregation is God’s chosen instrument to bring healing to broken and dysfunctional relationships among individuals, families, and communities.

SELF-LABELING

This is an interesting video, & the values it expresses really appeal to a lot of people. 

There is a lot to be said for not passively letting our culture define who we are; but the question then arises about where we get that definition. The definition is just as limited if it is centered on the self. It must recognize God’s sovereign plan for people.

I read Matthew 20 today; there are three accounts there that reflect God’s authority to say who we are. The first (verses 1-16) is about the “unfair wage practices” of the owner of the vineyard, which Jesus says resemble the Kingdom of Heaven.

The second account (verses 17-28) talks about how God determines the future & fate of His servants. For Jesus it was the cross. For His disciples, it is whatever path that He is His wisdom determines will make each one a servant to others & to the Kingdom.

The final account (verses 29-34) shows that the crowd didn’t want to be troubled or inconvenienced by a desperate need. But Jesus dismissed the “majority opinion” & stopped to ask what may have seemed like a silly question. He then healed them. He does what He will regardless of the often sensible-sounding reasons we give to question His wisdom.

This passage & this video both reveal a major part of our real problem – our hearts are in a state of rebellion against God thru our self-will.

We cannot accurately or completely define ourselves. Only the God who created us & gave His Son for us can do that.  And He’s very happy to lead us along the process of finding out who we are.

HAVE MERCY ON MY EARS, LORD!

One of the issues related to music in church that I haven’t heard a lot about is whether or not it is conducive to our sensitivity to what the Holy Spirit is trying to say to us at any given instant as individuals or as a congregation. Maybe it’s my age, or maybe I’m just getting more prone to sensory overload. But it seems to me that in general terms, the less sensory stimulation I’m experiencing, the easier it is to be sensitive to the Lord’s voice.

There is sometimes a line drawn between “good” & “not so good” worship music. Sometimes the measure of its quality is how much it stirs the emotions & overpowers the senses. When I refer to senses & emotions, I’m not talking about the deep parts of our lives that only the Spirit can discern – I mean the emotional response to various outer stimuli, the kind of emotional response that can change in an instant.

I haven’t followed what’s happening in Larry Norman’s life for a long time, but I’ll never forget this song. But at the same time, I wonder if we should be more discerning about what we call “good” music. After all, worship is for the Lord, & not so much about our definition of good.

COMMUNITY VERSUS COLLECTIVE

A blessed & happy Independence Day weekend to you!

As we celebrate the birthday of our nation, I thought it might be good to consider an important issue. This issue defines a lot of how we see ourselves, & which will also determine whether our descendants will experience the same freedoms that my generation has often taken for granted.

That issue is whether we see ourselves as members of a community or a collective.

The stereotype of Americans as rugged individualists, although somewhat accurate, is not totally true. Most of America’s accomplishments have happened as a result of groups of citizens who voluntarily worked together in a cooperative & mutually beneficial way.

This is what I mean by community. This is a vital key to understanding the greatness of our beloved nation.

On the other hand, a collectivist understanding of America sees its greatness as a result of an entirely different dynamic at work. It sees a centralized authority populated by people who are a little wiser & more altruistic than the average American. They know what is best for all, & deserve the authority & power to make such decisions. Also, they live far from the mundane realities of life so that they can make the most objective decisions for the people.

The brazen statement “You didn’t build that” comes from this collectivist mentality. “It Takes a Village” also reflects a worldview where government (a collective, not a community) is the best parent for the next generation.

During this Independence Day weekend, please remember that we are celebrating the exceptional results of voluntary association (or community) and not an impersonal, centralized, faceless, inefficient, out-of-touch collective.