We've Moved!

Yes, everything is packed up, and the "Two Men and a Truck" guys just carried out the last box. So come over and see me at:

www.thinktew.com.

I'll leave the light on for you.

Who's Watching the Watchdogs III

The last Watchdog. OK, let's light this candle, because even I am getting bored with this. It has recently come to my attention that I am not the only one to become alarmed at the tone of the debate taking place within the Christian community, especially as it relates to taking sides on the issues of the emerging church and contemplative spirituality.

It was recently discussed as a concern on the Relevant Podcast, the audio companion to Relevant Magazine. Not so much the controversy itself, but the ugly turn the debate has taken. Then I recently read an article in my daily Christianity Today e-mail newsletter titled " The Attack Dogs of Christendom". I like that name even better than Watchdogs. More to the point. They discuss a different website than I did, but a similar modus operandi. An excerpt, then I will comment:


What disturbs me...is the extent to which some Christians have turned themselves into the self-appointed attack dogs of Christendom. They seem determined to savage not only opponents of Christianity, but also fellow believers of whose doctrinal positions they disapprove.

A troll through the Internet reveals websites so drenched in sarcasm and animosity that an agnostic, or a follower of another faith tradition interested in what it means to become a Christian, might be permanently disillusioned.

None of the major figures of American Protestantism in the past quarter-century have been spared from attack, from Billy Graham to Rick Warren, from Tim LaHaye to Robert Schuller. The attacks, moreover, are not reasoned or modestly couched criticism, but blasts of ire determined to discredit beyond redemption the targets of the criticism.

The angriest websites are those belonging to small, but disturbingly visible, fundamentalist Protestant groups outraged that fellow Protestants appear to be holding out a welcoming hand to Catholics or Orthodox Christians.

So I am not alone in decrying this disturbing trend. So why quit? Because when I read websites so drenched in sarcasm and animosity, I know that I am prone to attack this sarcasm and animosity through the use of much sarcasm and animosity. That is my nature. At what point do I become one of them? That is why I was of two minds in posting Watchdogs II at all. I knew that I was going to put the gloves down, but I wanted to get in one last punch. So I did eventually post it, but I actually edited out some of the sarcasm and animosity. It is not without an edge, but it is better than it was.

I got to the point where I came to realize that the more I talked about them, the more attention they would get. You know what they say, there is no such thing as bad publicity. So my new policy will be to avoid getting down in the mud with them. To more or less ignore them. To express my opposing views in more positive and uplifting ways.

This is not to be interpreted as me becoming one of those "doctrine divides, so let's all just get along" guys. I have strongly held beliefs, and I will defend them, but hopefully without the sarcasm and animosity for the other side.

I have read through the Gospels many times, in fact have memorized over half of them, and I do not recall even once Jesus saying "They will know you are my disciples by your utter contempt for one another". I guess that is what concerns me most. This is not an in-house debate. There is nothing more public than Internet blogs and websites, and the outside world is watching. How do we look?

I close, amazingly enough, with the Charles Spurgeon Morning & Evening devotional for this very evening, September 11th:

"Lead me, O Lord, in Thy righteousness because of mine enemies."—Psalms 5:8.

ERY bitter is the enmity of the world against the people of Christ. Men will forgive a thousand faults in others, but they will magnify the most trivial offence in the followers of Jesus. Instead of vainly regretting this, let us turn it to account, and since so many are watching for our halting, let this be a special motive for walking very carefully before God. If we live carelessly, the lynx-eyed world will soon see it, and with its hundred tongues, it will spread the story, exaggerated and emblazoned by the zeal of slander. They will shout triumphantly. "Aha! So would we have it! See how these Christians act! They are hypocrites to a man." Thus will much damage be done to the cause of Christ, and much insult offered to His name. The cross of Christ is in itself an offence to the world; let us take heed that we add no offence of our own. It is "to the Jews a stumblingblock": let us mind that we put no stumblingblocks where there are enough already. "To the Greeks it is foolishness": let us not add our folly to give point to the scorn with which the worldly-wise deride the gospel. How jealous should we be of ourselves! How rigid with our consciences! In the presence of adversaries who will misrepresent our best deeds, and impugn our motives where they cannot censure our actions, how circumspect should we be! Pilgrims travel as suspected persons through Vanity Fair. Not only are we under surveillance, but there are more spies than we reck of. The espionage is everywhere, at home and abroad. If we fall into the enemies' hands we may sooner expect generosity from a wolf, or mercy from a fiend, than anything like patience with our infirmities from men who spice their infidelity towards God with scandals against His people. O Lord, lead us ever, lest our enemies trip us up!

Who's Watching the Watchdogs II

Well, so much for thought-for-the-day. More like thought-for-the-week. Or in this case, thought-for-the-fortnight-and-a-half. For some of my more astute quarter dozen regular readers, you may have read this post last Sunday or Monday, then saw it disappear for awhile. That's because I was of two minds in posting it vs. not posting it, and as you can see, the posting mind won.

Yes, this is the long-awaited and oft-promised follow-up to the Who's Watching the Watchdogs post. And though I have said that this would provide enough blog fodder to post daily until the Lord's return, this is probably my next-to-last post on this topic. So I will list here just four issues (the stinkin' hilarious one I promised in a previous post, then three of a more serious nature) that I have with the Watchdog sites, (www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com for the purposes of this discussion), then follow it up later with my last Watchdog post (including why it is my last Watchdog post, and why two minds on this one), and then move on to happier thoughts in future posts.

1. I will cover the "stinkin' hiilarious" one first. I really shouldn't laugh, but if I didn't laugh, I'd cry. I found it an entertaining exercise to enter the name of any Christian leader whom I respected, and almost invariably they showed up on their shun list. Even Billy Graham, though they are not dumb enough to go all out after him, was criticized for once saying something nice about Pope John Paul II. But I digress.

One of my favorite preachers podcasting today is Mark Driscoll, of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. And sure enough, they had some major problems with his reading list posted on his website for church leaders in his "Acts 29" church planting network, and because of this, were urging John Piper to disinvite Mark Driscoll from speaking at his Desiring God conference last fall. To his credit, John Piper did not disinvite Mark Driscoll, and in fact gave him an impassioned defense, both in his introduction of him to speak, and in his conference closing comments. But again I digress.

As I was reading the Lighthouse Trails indictment against Mark Driscoll, I came across the following, which had me ROTFL, as the kids say nowadays...

"The question therefore has been put to us, is Driscoll a promoter of contemplative spirituality and the emerging church movement? Perhaps one of the best places to look for this answer is Driscoll's ministry, Acts 29 Network (incidentally, there is no Acts 29 in the Bible)."

Busted, Driscoll! There is no Acts 29 in the Bible! Maybe if you read it once in awhile you would know that!

Actually, I am pretty sure he does know that. In fact, that is the whole point, obviously lost on his inquisitors. We are Acts 29. It is up to us to carry on the mission of the church we read about in Acts 1-28. Get it?

2. Like Mark Driscoll, another lightning rod podcasting preacher, you either love him or you hate him, is Erwin McManus. Here are some kind words for Mr. McManus, embedded in an article about the equally "dangerous" David Jeremiah:

"Jeremiah's affinity with Erwin McManus, who says it is his goal to destroy Christianity, should cause discerning, Bible-believing Christians to take notice and be aware."

The level of hyperbole here is breathtaking. Really? Is that what Erwin McManus is all about? A modern day Saul, intent on persecuting and destroying all who call on the name of Jesus? Hardly.

Elsewhere amongst their newsletters, we get the full quote:

Emerging church leader, Erwin McManus says his "goal is to destroy Christianity as a world religion and be a recatalyst for the movement of Jesus Christ."

Christianity is not a religion but a relationship. I have heard Erwin say it, and many others before him. Hardly rises to the level of heresy. In fact, Jesus himself had a name for the strict religionists of his day - "you brood of vipers!"

Some other "dangerous" Christian leaders whom we are to avoid - Philip Yancey, Chuck Swindoll, Jack Hayford, Richard Foster, Moody Bible, Wheaton College, Bethel Seminary, you name it, they are all here. Anyone who dares speak of the mystery, the spiritual, the supernatural in Christian experience is suspect.

3. Another handy service they provide is the bookstore alert. They will let you know whenever their covert spies have found overtly non-Christian books in Christian bookstores, including books on Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam. Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims, oh my! So what is their point? Reading a book on Islam does not make me a Muslim, but it might make me better equipped to share Christ with a Muslim friend. I have read Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf. If you ask me, required reading for any amateur WWII buff. But does that make me a Nazi? Nein.

4. Now we get to the crux of the matter. What their big hangup with "contemplative spirituality" is all about. The following is excerpted (though still lengthy) from the article "When You Pray, Say...":

"Between contemplative spirituality and biblical Christianity there reside watershed distinctions between first, the definition, and then, the practice of prayer. Simply stated, prayer is talking to God. In speaking to God, believers are free to disclose their hearts' deepest longings and vexations to him, including their feelings, fears, secrets, sins, praises, petitions, doubts, complaints, thanksgiving, troubles, and more, the prayers of Jesus and the saints in the Bible providing example.Within evangelicalism, the contemplative prayer movement is affecting this mediated understanding of prayer. The narrator in the "Be Still" DVD states that, "Contemplation is different from other types of Christian prayer." In explaining how this form of prayer differs from traditional prayer, Richard Foster says, "Contemplative prayer is listening prayer. It is attentiveness. . . . It's being all ears to what the Father has to say to us." He then quotes Nicholas Grou who requested, "O divine master, teach me this mute language which says so much."[1]
...
Yet other evangelical speakers, pastors and authors are also embracing and recommending contemplative prayer with the goal of hearing God directly speak to them. One testifies, "And so I've just begun . . . to make a conscious effort to be in a time of prayer and, yes, to speak to him, but then to consciously say, 'Okay, I'm done talkin' now, because I'm just gonna sit here in the stillness and wait to see what it is that you want to say to me'."[2] The question therefore arises, is contemplative prayer, or cultivating "the quiet," supported in Scripture? Is it a spiritual discipline encouraged in God's Word? Or is this manner of prayer simply a device of human invention?...

Read entire article, "WHEN YOU PRAY, SAY . . ."

Did you get out of that what I did? Prayer is, and must remain, one-way communication. It is talking to God, not listening to God. Once you start listening to God, you are now dabbling in that spooky occult stuff. The author asks the question, "The question therefore arises, is contemplative prayer, or cultivating "the quiet," supported in Scripture? Is it a spiritual discipline encouraged in God's Word?" He says no, but I say that prayer as two-way communication is all over Scripture.

In the interest of time, I will share only one of my favorite Psalms:

1 How long, O LORD ? Will you forget me forever?
How long will you hide your face from me?

2 How long must I wrestle with my thoughts
and every day have sorrow in my heart?
How long will my enemy triumph over me?

3 Look on me and answer, O LORD my God.
Give light to my eyes, or I will sleep in death;

4 my enemy will say, "I have overcome him,"
and my foes will rejoice when I fall.

5 But I trust in your unfailing love;
my heart rejoices in your salvation.

6 I will sing to the LORD,
for he has been good to me.

-Psalm 13

David is agonizing over God's silence. He is pleading with God to talk to him. "Look on me and answer, O LORD my God." He is listening and longing for an answer as to why he is in distress. But note that in the end, even in the silence, he is singing for joy on the basis of what he already knows of God.

So go ahead. Talk to God. Listen to God. And trust, rejoice, sing, even in the silent times.

Ezra's Fulcrum

I never had a son. And since it is difficult for a writer to convey, and for a reader to interpret, emotion in the written word, I need to tell you that I say that with no sense of regret or melancholy or sadness whatsoever. Because if I know anything about genetics, any son of mine would grow up, like me, skinny and geeky and beat up a lot for no reason. I wouldn't wish that on any kid, much less my own. So God in His wisdom gave me two daughters, for whom I am eternally grateful, and gave the sons to my brother the jock. And since I am now fifty years old, it is, and hopefully shall remain a moot point. But if I was 20 years younger and having a son, I think I would like to name him Ezra. I know, if he wasn't going to get beat up already, this certainly wouldn't help. And I am pretty sure Marcia would never let it happen. But remember, this is all hypothetical anyway. So why Ezra? Not yet. First a little bit about the second part of what I admit is one of my more obscure titles to date.

OK, closed book test. No Google, no Wikipedia, don't even Ask Jeeves. Think back to third grade, and try to list as many "simple machines" as you can. I'll give you a minute...how many did you come up with? You probably did better than me. I only remembered the pulley and the lever. Wikipedia helped me out with the inclined plane, the wheel & axle, the wedge and the screw.

For the purposes of this post, I hope to refresh our memories about the lever in particular. I don't remember much, but I do remember that the triangle thing in the middle that allows the lever to go up and down and provides its power and usefulness, is called the fulcrum. As I recall, it looks something like this:

So we have Ezra (not necessarily the guy in the overalls) and we have a fulcrum.

Now let's try and put them together.

My Daily Reading Bible recently took me through the book of Ezra, where I came upon the following new life verse (among many) for me:

For Ezra had set his heart to study the Law of the LORD, and to do it and to teach his statutes and rules in Israel.
-Ezra 7:10

I love this verse. Ezra set his heart to do three things: to study, to do and to teach. I think the key to this verse is the middle of the three, the fulcrum of this lever if you will, those four little words, "and to do it". I couldn't Google this image, since it exists only in my head, and Google isn't that good yet (but don't think they're not trying), so I have tried to recreate a crude approximation of what I see in my mind's eye, via some good old fashioned HTML:

Study_____________________________Teach Do

What Ezra has set his heart to do is precisely what I desire for myself. To study and to teach the word of God. But without the "Do" fulcrum in the middle, the effort expended on the one end in studying will fail to lift up those on the other end through teaching. To study and not to do is worthless. Scripture is permeated with this truth.

"Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it—he will be blessed in what he does."
-James 1:22-25

"Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and not do what I tell you? Everyone who comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show you what he is like: he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when a flood arose, the stream broke against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built. But the one who hears and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the stream broke against it, immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great."
-Luke 6:46-49

A house without a foundation falls flat. Like a lever without a fulcrum.

Study. Do. Teach.

A Post Worthy of Screwtape

My third post in 10 days. Am I going too fast for you? Are you keeping up? In order to set the table for this post, I will need to drop a few quotes on you from a previous post - Is God Relentless?

• Going way back to my So Many Pedestrians post, I mentioned my Bible reading plan, which consisted of a daily dose of one chapter of Psalms, three OT, one Gospel, one NT, resulting in various repetitions through each section in a year. There was only one problem with this plan. That is, if you miss a day, double it, if you miss two days, triple it, and before I know it, I'm trying to read 20 chapters in a day with the only goal of catching up to my schedule, and not of meditating on God's word. Easy solution. I am no longer obsessed with catching up...

• Also, since I am no longer racing against the calendar (and inevitably losing), I have allowed myself the freedom to cut back to one chapter of OT per day. As a result, now at the pace of only four chapters total per day, it allows me to slow down and think about what I am reading...

• In short, I am less interested in getting through the Bible and more interested in the Bible getting through me.

These are just excerpts. As I go back and read the first four paragraphs of that post, they could just as easily have been one of The Screwtape Letters. (If you are unfamiliar with this wonderful little book, you will need to click on the link and at least read the synopsis before continuing - but I am moving on with the assumption that most are familiar with the premise).

It has been awhile since I read it last, so perhaps this or something similar was actually one of "The Screwtape Letters". If so, my apologies, purely coincidence, no lawsuits please, just call me Clive. But I think it would have gone something like this:

My Dear Wormwood,

I see that your patient has started reading his Bible. This is bad news. When it comes to this, the reading of the Word of the Enemy, you must convince your patient that less is more. That reading too much may actually be harmful. That breadth and depth are mutually exclusive. Put in his head a pithy little catch phrase like, "It is more important that the Bible get through me than that I get through the Bible", all the while hiding from him the obvious truth that the former will never happen without the latter. Lead him to believe that calendars and checklists and daily goals are our idea. Let him justify his newfound philosophy with spiritually sounding phrases like "Freedom in Christ", all the while hiding from him the obvious truth that "If you aim at nothing, you are sure to hit it." Convince him that seven chapters, or about fifteen minutes, a day, is way too much to receive any benefit from the reading. And if seven chapters is too much, then four chapters must be better. And if four chapters are better, then one chapter would be even better. And if one chapter is even better, then one verse would be fantastic. And so on, and so on, until eventually, you will have your patient simply and quite proudly meditating upon the letter 'a'.

Your affectionate uncle,
Screwtape

So how and when did I come upon this realization that actually setting a goal to read through the Bible in a year and following through with it might even be a good thing? I was simply browsing the Bible section at Northwestern Bookstore, as is my custom, when I came upon the "ESV Daily Reading Bible". Note the subtle difference in title. It is not the "ESV One Year Bible", and as such is not laid out in the standard One Year Bible format, with various passages presented for each day of the year. Rather, it is laid out like any other Bible, and as such can be read and studied and carried to church like any other Bible. The only difference is that there are dates simply printed in the margin, so you know where you are supposed to be reading on any given day, with the other passages for that day printed at the bottom of the page for quick reference. But you rarely need those references, as it also comes with three ribbon markers, to keep your place in the Old Testament, Psalms, and New Testament each day. And if you follow through with the daily readings as presented, it will take you through the Old Testament once, and the Psalms and New Testament twice each year.

So to make a long story not as long, as I stood there holding this Bible in my hand, I became deeply convicted that this is what I needed to do. So I bought it, and have been using it ever since, but still with notebook and pen in hand, the same notebook which will be the source material for many future posts here.

So I am not saying that you must use the "ESV Daily Reading Bible" as I am, (perhaps the ESV itself isn't really your "thing"), but I would encourage you to read whatever Bible you cherish early and often. I once read a church sign, (which usually makes me cringe, but this one happened to be ours), which said, "Parents need to spend quality time with their kids - lots of it." That was referring to the oft-quoted cop out of parents who spend "quality time" with their kids, i.e., not very much. But I think it also applies to what I am saying here. You need to spend quality time in the Word - lots of it.

Footnote: If you enjoyed The Screwtape Letters, I would highly recommend the audiobook version, as read by John Cleese, of Monty Python fame. He is perfect for the task. Also, in my research, I learned that The Screwtape Letters movie is in the works, from the same producers who brought us The Chronicles of Narnia, due out next year. I'm there.

Feels Like "Forty"

Here I am, back again, less than a week later. So those of you who made a bet with your friend or spouse or both that you would not see me again until September, pay up.

I have been attending Bloomington Baptist Church (in Bloomington, MN) for about 42 years, and the highlight of those years took place back in the summer of 2004, when our youth pastor, Cliff Johnson, had this crazy idea to engage our church, that is, our entire congregation, in forty days of 24/7 prayer, built around a theme and logo of the word "Forty". I won't go into detail, but as I have mentioned before, there was at that time a feeling of unity and purpose in our church that I have not felt before or since. Until now...

Sunday, July 29th, we experienced a concert of prayer, as we gathered in groups of 3-6, and prayed through various topics, interspersed with times of worship. A very powerful time, but we were just getting started. Then we had the business meeting for which the prayer meeting was much needed preparation. At said meeting, we voted to call a Senior Pastor, Bob Bakke, and an Associate Pastor, Bryan Moak, after having been without a Senior Pastor for a year and a half, and with no permanent professional staff since the beginning of this year. This had to be the first time that I saw people openly weeping in a church business meeting (at least with tears of joy). It marked the end of a very turbulent past, and the beginning of a very exciting future.

And you can imagine my surprise and delight when my Daily Reading Bible brought me to II Chronicles 29-30 on that date. There I read an account of a people celebrating a new beginning in the temple of the LORD, just as I had experienced hours earlier. My jottings from that day...

"Hezekiah and all the people rejoiced at what God had brought about for his people, because it was done so quickly." - II Chronicles 29:36

Like them, we too rejoiced at what God had brought about for his people, because it is unexplainable apart from God. And like them, it was done quickly. I know that a year and a half may not be anyone's idea of "quickly", but the staff as it was voted on in its final configuration went from dream to possibility to reality within a matter of weeks, not months or years.

"The hand of God was also on Judah to give them one heart to do what the kings and the princes commanded by the word of the LORD." - II Chronicles 30:12

Like Judah, we also desire the hand of God to be upon us to give us one heart to do the things - and here is where we move from Old to New Testament church - that Jesus commands us to do by the Word of the LORD. It is not for us to sit back now and watch these two pastors work their magic. As Bob has said on many occasions, we are all in this together (my apologies to anyone who now has "High School Musical" stuck in their head), and we are each called to step up and do our part in what God has in store for us.

This last Sunday, 8/5, was our first official Sunday with Bob as our new Senior Pastor, and the feeling of joy and anticipation was palpable. And imagine my surprise and delight when my Daily Reading Bible led me that day to Ezra 9. My jottings...

"But now for a brief moment favor has been shown by the LORD our God, to leave us a remnant and to give us a secure hold within his holy place, that our God may brighten our eyes and grant us a little reviving in our slavery." - Ezra 9:8

This one isn't quite the perfect analogy, but a number of words jumped out at me.

"But now for a brief moment" - this is the part I hope is not part of the analogy, but I am thankful for each moment he gives us going forward in ministry together.

"favor has been shown by the LORD our God" - again, I truly believe this, because what I have just seen happen could not have happened apart from divine intervention.

"a remnant" - remnant may be a little strong, but I feel that those who are still here were meant to see this, and those who left, we need to invite back.

"a secure hold within this holy place" - God once again has given us a secure hold within this holy place, which only a few short months ago was threatening to crumble.

"brighten our eyes" - in order that we might look up and look ahead, after so long looking down and looking behind.

"and grant us a little reviving" - here I used the ESV version purposely, because it uses the word "reviving" instead of "relief". I pray for revival within and without our walls, and our giant baby steps (an oxymoron, I know, but I feel them both) of the last few weeks are just the beginning.

"in our slavery" - like I said, not a perfect analogy, but if I had to make it fit, I would say in our slavery to self and to mediocrity of ministry and mission.

So to wrap it up and to bring it full circle, I don't know if anyone else feels this strongly, but when I walk into our church now, for the first time in over three years, I can truly say, "It feels like 'Forty'".

Footnote: Astute readers may be scratching their heads (if I actually had blog readers with multiple heads) over my mention of the "Daily Reading Bible", after I had previously come out so strongly against schedules and deadlines and quotas in my daily Bible reading routine (see "Is God Relentless?"). I will explain this change of heart in my next post. There, a cliffhanger to bring you back!

A New Philosophy

A new philosophy? What? Zen Buddhism? Nothing so drastic or as interesting as all that (though I found "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" to be a good read). No, just a new blogging philosophy. Rather than a once-a-month (or less) 2000-word tome, I am moving to a more quick-hit, 500-850 word thought-for-the-day style of posting. Note that I did not say thought-for-every-day, so if that is what you are looking forward to, then prepare yourself for disappointment. But if you check back every few days, there may be a better than 50/50 chance that the infuriatingly stagnant title at the top of the page will be new and different. How is that for a solid commitment?

I had many candidates for my first thought-for-the-day post, including continuing with the "Watching the Watchdog" theme of my last post, which, truth be told, provides enough blog fodder to post daily until the Lord returns. But I will keep my topics varied, and the first follow-up Watchdog post will come later. It is stinkin' hilarious. So then I was going to report on the goings-on at our church last Sunday. A glorious day, but that also will have to wait.


Because last night at about 6:05pm, the 35W bridge over the Mississippi River collapsed right here in my hometown, and it gave me pause. I feel I would be remiss if I did not at least mention the tragedy that occurred right in my own backyard (metaphorically speaking) just last night.

Many of you may have been touched by this, knowing someone either involved, or nearly involved in the bridge collapse. A son-in-law of a good friend was on the bridge when it collapsed, but he survived. Back problems, and short-term memory problems, but survived and expected to recover. Praise God.

I also know someone who was returning home from Bethel where he works, and passed over that bridge at 6:00pm, about 5 minutes before it collapsed. Think about that for a second. Had he decided to finish up one more thing at work, and set out five minutes later, his life and that of his family could be very different right now.

So what to say about this? The first question on everyone's lips is, "why"? In times of tragedy like this, as was also the case on 9/11, my mind is drawn to the following passage of Scripture:

Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2Jesus answered, "Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish."
-Luke 13:1-4

As words of comfort go, I don't know that these would be the first words out of my mouth if I am sitting with someone who is dealing with a loss through this tragedy. And if that is you, my heart goes out to you. This little story from Scripture may not answer the question "why" for you, but it should eliminate some wrong answers to that question.

I would ask you to think for a moment about where you were last night at 6:05pm. I had caught a ride early with Betsy, and was sitting outside the back door of church (as I had forgotten my wallet and thus my card key), waiting for someone to show up and let me in for prayer meeting. Where were you? And why were you there, and not crossing the 35W bridge over the Mississipi River at that moment? And out of all the thousands of cars that had passed over that bridge that day, why were those particular people in those particular cars on that particular bridge at that particular time when the bridge support gave way and the bridge fell into the river? I don't know.

But someone asked Jesus an almost identical question, as recorded in Luke 13, in reference to some Galileans who had met an unfortunate end at the hands of Pilate. Jesus addresses the Galilean question, and then adds one of his own. Evidently there were eighteen people in the wrong place at the wrong time when a tower of Siloam collapsed on them, and they died - an event known to his hearers, as he refers to them as "those eighteen who died".

And Jesus anticipates the "why" question regarding both the Galileans and the Eighteen. Were the Galileans worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? Were the eighteen more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem, who did not happen to be standing under that tower when it fell? Jesus' answer is the same in both cases - "I tell you no, but unless you repent, you too will all perish."

So what is he saying here? Doesn't this seem a little insensitive? I think what he is saying is that it just as easily could have been you standing under the tower of Siloam. There is no inherent goodness within you that kept you away from the tower, just as there was no inherent evil which caused the eighteen to be standing under it. So the next time tragedy strikes, there is no inherent reason that it couldn't be your turn. So repent, lest you too perish.

So fast forward 2000 years to the 35-W bridge. The last count I saw listed 4 dead and 20 missing as a result of the collapse. Were they more guilty than all the others living in Minneapolis? I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you too will all perish.

Caribou Coffee has a slogan - "Life is short. Stay awake for it". I would amend that slightly - "Life is short. Repent." Probably won't sell much coffee...

Who's Watching the Watchdogs?

I know that by recent Tom Wilson standards, this is a lightning fast return to the blogosphere, but something raised my ire today that I felt was blogworthy. For those who are new to this blog, I would like to say that I am not usually this strident in my tone. Please read my other posts and you will see that I am a loveable little teddy bear of a blogger. But this one comes from the gut, moreso than any of the others, some of which were posted just to satisfy the demands of certain blogophiles, who shall remain nameless.

So now that I have your curiosity piqued, as to what could possibly get the normally level-headed, calm demeanor of Tom Wilson somewhere north of comatose, just hang in there, and we will get to it. I spoke (wrote?) in my last post, Game's Locked, about some thoughts I had on the "emergent church". So I will start with a disclaimer that I feel I will need to cut and paste into every subsequent post on this topic, in that there is much in the emergent church (forgive me if I tire of putting quotes around it all the time, if you feel it is necessary, feel free to add them mentally), that I have concerns about. But my purpose here is not to bash the emergent church, but mainly to ask the question, what qualifies to be labeled as the "emergent church"? I think if you gathered a hundred different anti-emergent activists in a room and asked them to define the emergent church, you would get a hundred different answers, but mostly all summarized with the statement "they are not like me". It is almost getting to the point where if I drive a Chevy, then anyone who drives a Ford is "emergent". (I told you I was worked up).

So here is where I am coming from. I got a phone call at work today, wherein I was informed that someone had seen that the "Global Day of Prayer" (hereafter referred to as GDOP, and in which I participated down at Northrup Auditorium this past May 27th) is on a list of "movements" that the right-minded Christian community should be concerned about and/or wary of. The exact quote would be, "the Global Day of Prayer is going to be a conduit for interspirituality through mystical meditation, and the results will be spiritually disastrous for millions." The precise name of the website was not known to me at first, so I was free to Google on my own to see what I could see. My initial Google search turned up several "watchdog" sites with which I was not previously familiar, evidently the self-appointed guardians of Truth and Orthodoxy in this Information Age. While this was going on, I got a second phone call, wherein I was informed that the website was "Lighthouse something", which narrowed my search, and I found the following:

www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com

First a word about their tagline, "Exposing the Dangers of Contemplative Spirituality". What does this mean, that we are not supposed to think too long or too deeply about our spiritual nature? So anyway, once there, I searched for "Global Day of Prayer" and found what I was looking for. What follows is a list of the "sins" of the GDOP movement. And these are verbatim quotes, not my paraphrase:

---

ALERT: Global Day of Prayer - May 27, 2007
The next Global Day of Prayer will take place on May 27th. People from around the world from many different countries will participate. The event began in 2000 in South Africa. The website describes the event:

IMAGINE the emerging generation from all the nations of the globe praying on the high places on 27 May 2007, the Global Day of Prayer . . . Yes, can you imagine the effect when on this day people from 220 nations of the globe fill stadiums, community centres, city squares, churches and all kinds of buildings?

The growing movement is hoping to unite all "Christian traditions" as this excerpt from an article in London UK explains:

Britain's [sic] is home to a wide range of Christian traditions, each of them have something to offer and we all have something to learn from each other. The exciting thing about the Global Day of Prayer is that it will bring together Christians from different ethnicities and different expressions of the Christian faith to pray for unity, London and the World.

---

1. Note first the word "emerging", which immediately flags them as suspect, no matter what the rest says. But I would guess if you polled the attendees in Northrup Auditorium on that day, a good number would respond, "the emerging what?"

2. Note also that they are going to pray "on the high places" - conjuring up in Watchdog minds, I'm sure, images of Baal worship from the Old Testament. I can think of higher places than Northrup Auditorium and Dallas. And yes, some around the world gathered on mountaintops, but personally, I can't work myself up to call that blasphemy.

3. Next, note that this growing movement is (heaven forbid) hoping to unite all "Christian traditions". What is the objection here? Is it the intermingling of "different ethnicities", or the intermingling of "different expressions of the Christian faith" that they find so distasteful? So maybe in this case, it is true what they say, "One man's heaven is another man's hell"...

"After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, 10and crying out with a loud voice, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!"" - Rev. 7:9,10

Another excerpt...

---

To understand more of the vision of the Global Day of Prayer, we need only look to the organization's youth program. In that section of the GDOP website, there are instructions on how to "mobilize young people far and wide." Unfortunately, this includes Pete Greig's Red Moon Risingbook and the 24/7 Boiler Rooms. While Greig's book and ministry may, at first glance, appear to be a movement of Christian prayer, research shows that both the book and the movement are heavily influenced by contemplative spirituality, Catholicism, and New Age thought. And while youth around the world are taking shifts (to pray) in Greig's boiler rooms (prayer rooms), they may be getting into something entirely different than biblical prayer. Please see links below to some of our previous articles about 24/7 prayer rooms and Red Moon Rising. We think you will find what we say to be true, and if this is the case, the Global Day of Prayer is going to be a conduit for interspirituality through mystical meditation, and the results will be spiritually disastrous for millions.
Right now, 24/7 prayer rooms are being added all over the world, and each year more countries are joining the Global Day of Prayer. With the strong emphasis on meditation in both the prayer rooms and the global prayer event, we believe this warning is warranted and vital.

---

So in addition to the first grave concern, that Christians of different ethnicities and expressions of faith will rub elbows, the second is equally as grave - as the title of the movement suggests, they might actually pray, and they might pray long and they might pray hard! Embedded in here is their objection to the 24/7 prayer movement, for which there are separate articles. And note the specific concerns:

1. Contemplative spirituality - again, not sure what they mean by this. I'm not much for fancy book learnin' but I will give you my take. Contemplate - think deeply, consider. Spirituality - matters of the soul.

2. Catholicism! Again, I must offer a disclaimer similar to the Emergent disclaimer above. There is much in the Catholic church with which I disagree. Though as a youth in Sunday School I studied Catholicism as a cult, and I know where my sensibilities are supposed to lie, I cannot extrapolate that to say that Catholic Christians (an oxymoron to some) have nothing to offer. I went to college at the University of Minnesota Duluth, where I was heavily involved in Intervarsity Christian Fellowship (IVCF), and literally across the street was the College of St. Scholastica, a private Catholic college, whose IVCF group consisted mainly, wonder of wonders, of Catholics, many of whom I got to know, and who loved the Lord and who wanted more than anything to introduce him to their fellow Catholics.

3. New Age - I will address this objection from the standpoint of my own experience. In the summer of 2004, we experienced forty days of 24/7 prayer in our church, and it was the most alive our church has been before or since. I myself, being a night person, took the midnight - 2am shift most nights, and yes, there were candles (a tool of the devil evidently - see letter quoted in my last post), and yes, I contemplated, and yes, I prayed, and yes, I read the Word (by candlelight!) and "Confessions" by Saint Augustine (talk about contemplative spirituality, better watch out for this guy), and even "Red Moon Rising" (by candlelight!), and they were precious and growing times for me. There was nothing New Age about it. So I guess I am having trouble "discerning", to use the buzzword, what part of deep, contemplative, private, on-my-face prayer to my Creator God that I am supposed to be afraid of.

I close with this, one of my favorite authors, Francis Schaeffer, and my #1 favorite book (to this point in my life), which I just finished re-reading for the second time and intend to read again, at least once a year. Perhaps I will write an extended treatise on this book in a future post. But it especially fits in this discussion, because he, Dr. Schaeffer, even deigned to use the new "S" word in the title - "True Spirituality". An extended excerpt - the illustraton of the chairs:

---

From the biblical view - the Judeo-Christian view - reality has two halves, like two halves of an orange. You do not have the whole orange unless you have both parts. One part is normally seen, and the other is normally unseen.

I would suggest that this may be illustrated by two chairs. The men who sit in these chairs look at the universe in two different ways. We are all sitting in one or the other of these chairs at every single moment of our lives. The first man sits in his chair and faces this total reality of the universe, the seen part and the normally unseen part, and consistently sees truth against this background. The Christian is a man who has said, "I sit in this chair." The unbeliever, however, is the man who sits in the other chair, intellectually. He sees only the natural part of the universe, and interprets truth against that background. Let us see that these two positions cannot both be true. One is true: one is false. If indeed there is only the natural portion of the universe, with a uniformity of natural causes in a closed system, then to sit in the other chair is to delude oneself. If, however, there are the two halves of reality, then to sit in the naturalist's chair is to be extremely naive and to misunderstand the universe completely. From the Christian viewpoint, no man has ever been so naive, nor so ignorant of the universe, as twentieth century man.

However, to be a true, Bible-believing Christian, we must understand that it is not enough simply to acknowledge that the universe has these two halves. The Christian life means living in the two halves of reality: the supernatural and the natural parts. I would suggest that it is perfectly possible for a Christian to be so infiltrated by twentieth-century thinking that he lives most of his life as though the supernatural were not there. Indeed, I would suggest that all of us do this to some extent. The supernatural does not touch the Christian only at new birth and then at his death, or at the second coming of Christ, leaving the believer on his own in a naturalistic world during all the time in between. Nothing could be further from the biblical view. Being a biblical Christian means living in the supernatural now - not only theoretically, but in practice.

---

Do you see it? The supernatural is here. The supernatural is now. I think there is a tendency by some, "infiltrated by twentieth-century thinking", to label any talk of the "supernatural", and moreover any attempt to connect with the "supernatural" through prayer and meditation, as somehow "mystical" or "New Age". But I contend that it is not. True Spirituality, to quote Shaeffer again, "means living in the supernatural now - not only theoretically, but in practice."

Something to contemplate. Spiritually.