He did this to demonstrate his justice

At a Sydney Writers' Festival event I attended a few weeks ago, Christopher Hitchens spoke about the gravity of misapplied words. The example he used was "child abuse", which he argued implies that all that is needed is repentence and forgiveness, when what is actually needed is justice for the "rape, torture and molestation of children". Leaving the language question aside, this example told me something about Hitchen's understanding of the relationship between forgiveness and justice. I hope that some day he finds out that in the death of Jesus justice was wholly served, and that it is only because of this that repentence and forgiveness are now available.

Prudes

We have become reverse-Victorians. They spoke openly about death but never mentioned sex, wheras we speak openly of sex but never mention death.


H/T Kirk

Over all

Paul Hiebert, a very clever man, came up with a dumb term for an insightful concept. He observed that people in non-Westerner cultures recognise myriad spiritual beings, which are regarded as very much involved in everyday life. Westerners tend to ignore the existance of these beings, and divide the world into an upper region (where God dwells) and a lower (where we dwell). And so he called the neglected realm of other spiritual beings the 'excluded middle'. The reason I think this is a silly term is because I don't think that the Bible gives us warrant to think of these beings as having their own special domain. Rather, the Bible speaks of God and his angels, and satan and his demons all in the one 'spiritual' category.

Anyway I wanted to say that when people from the non-Western world become Christians they really struggle to believe that God has power over the spirit world. So when they get sick they think this is somehow out of God's domain and they go to a witchdoctor for answers. But we Westerners do much the same thing - when we become Christians we really struggle to believe that God has power over the material world. So when our car breaks down we think that this is somehow out of God's domain and we fiddle around under the bonnet. God is, in truth, more powerful than all things and is ever in control of all things, and it is good for us to recognise this.


H/T Chris

Sexual temptation

David Cook did a guest lecture about sexual temptation in church leadership. I took notes (which is after all the point).

Ten reasons for vulnerability:

1. Your office is in an isolated location.
2. You have a close relationship with people.
3. You have access to peoples' bedrooms when they are sick. (The only other profession that has this privilege is medicine).
4. You may be subject to stimulating conversation (eg by people telling about
   their sexual past because they mistakenly believe that you're not subject to sexual temptation).
5. You're eager to please.
6. You're susceptible to criticism (and so seek affection and support in its wake).
7. You (and those around you) suffer from the myth of invulnerability.
8. You may have weakened relationships with your family.
9. You may have had inadequate training about sexual temptation.
10. Your leadership status may turn you into a sex object.

His suggestions for prevention were to:

1. Have a public office and be careful to use appropriate touch;
2. Remember your secure standing in the Lord;
3. Spend quality time with your family;
4. Know yourself;
5. Be professional (eg leave your office door open, limit conversations, don't
   give assurance of confidentiality, always be able to share things with your
   spouse);
6. Take responsibility (like King David did);
7. Be accountable to someone (end by asking each other if you've lied in the conversation).

Bold compassion

Ash explains why Christian social ethics can be championed in a spirit of love rather than panic:

No institution that is part of the created order can be destroyed by human disobedience. Human nonconformity leads not to the destruction of the order, but to judgment on human beings. No Christian movement needs to defend marriage: rather we seek to protect human beings against the damage done to them by cutting across the grain of the order of marriage.

Ibid, 82.

Changed

It's dangerous and fruitless to be more enamoured with searching than with finding. Ash says it well:

[H]ermeneutics is more than simple open-mindedness. It has been said that the purpose of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth at a meal, is in order to close it on something. So Thiselton adds the perceptive observation of Paul Ricoeur that hermeneutics must involve a double dynamic: on the one hand, the interpreter must be inherently suspicious, particularly of himself and his presuppositions, but on the other, he must be willing to listen to the text and to obey as he understands . . . . To sit under the text of Scripture is to be uncomfortable; we ought to be suspicious of any hermeneutic which renders us more comfortable. The command to repent and believe is fundamental to the gospel and we never move beyond its stringent discipline.

C Ash, Marriage: Sex in the Service of God (Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 2003), 79.

It's like . . .

Over the last few weeks I've preached the same sermon three times. David Cook said it would be a good idea. I was worried about losing my mojo, but he turned out to be right. The first time was in the midst of college madness and I didn't have time to think of any illustrations. Everyone commented on the clarity of my logic and structure. The second time I hardly changed a thing other than including some illustrations, and suddenly everyone was saying that my structure could be clearer. I guess this is because when you give an illustration everyone 'gets off the bus', and needs to be reminded where they were when they get back on again.