About Me
This is a great post by Uwe Simeon-Netto from Concordia Theological Seminary in St. Louis talking about the problems of Lutherans not stepping up in the public realm. He equates some of the problem a the loss of Two Kingdom theology. I think his criticism is fair and that often Lutherans huddle up too much.
Most non Lutherans I've talked with are blown away and hungry for the gospel and specifically for the Lutheran - biblical views on sin, the human condition and on the forgiveness of sins.
Simul Justus et Peccator
T
We Are Needed
Are Lutherans afraid to take on the world?
(from the November 2006 issue of the Lutheran Witness)
By Uwe Siemon-Netto
Here’s a question for my fellow Lutherans: When did we all become Old Order Mennonites? I am not joking. Only eleven years short of the Reformation’s 500th anniversary I seriously wonder how Lutheran we still are.
How come we don’t engage this warped postmodern world in which we live? How come we don’t face it head-on? Could it be that Lutherans don’t like dirtying their hands much in politics and in the major media, even though this is precisely what our theology tells us we should do?
Some Old Order Mennonites forbid political office to Christians. Well, they are entitled to their views. They don’t vote either, neither do they drink and make merry, go to the movies or laze around South Beach.
But that’s not the Lutheran way. Lutherans are expected to follow the Augsburg Confession, which roundly condemns in article 16 “those who do not locate evangelical perfection in the fear of God and in faith, but place it in forsaking political office.”
By the time you read this column the 2006 mid-term elections will probably be over. I don’t have to be a clairvoyant to predict right now that once again Lutherans will be woefully underrepresented among the 535 members of Congress. They always are. In the 109th Congress, only 20 of Lutherans held seats – 16 from the ELCA, three from the LCMS, and one solitary man from WELS.
On the other hand, there were 44 Episcopalians, whose church is a mere quarter as big as the three Lutheran denominations put together.
I am not whining. I don’t blame others. There is no anti-Lutheran pogrom afoot in the United States. Nobody keeps Lutherans out of politics deliberately, as there is nobody preventing Lutherans from reaching the most influential positions in journalism – nobody, that is, than Lutherans themselves.
I have heard it say that the Hate-the-Hun hysteria after World Wear I sent Lutherans into the catacombs, including Lutherans who are not even of German descent. Is that why there hasn’t been a Lutheran President of the United States? Well, Dwight D. Eisenhower was a two-term president. He wasn’t a Lutheran, but he was of German origin, and nobody held that against him.
So what’s the matter with us? Are we embarrassed by our identity? Sometimes it seems that way. There are Lutherans who want to be just mainline Protestants. Then there are Lutherans who want to be no different from Baptists. Then there are Lutherans who think like the late Rev. James D. Ford, Chaplain of the House of Representatives. “Lutheran, that’s boring,” he was overheard saying dismissively when somebody mentioned his denomination.
When I was at seminary, it was fashionable for Lutherans to call themselves beer-drinking Episcopalians. And when I went back to Germany recently I was stunned that even at a meeting of allegedly confessional Lutherans a participant suggested that we had better do away with our two kingdoms doctrine.
Well, if we did that Chaplain Ford would indeed be right: What a boring lot we would be! Imagine Lutherans without the liberating knowledge of being citizens of two realms, the spiritual and, yes, the unredeemed secular kingdom, where we must involve ourselves; where we must roll up our sleeves and act according to natural reason; where we lovingly serve our neighbors by performing our chores to the best of our abilities.
Imagine living without the knowledge while we do our duty in this sinful world we always have Christ’s right-hand kingdom to turn to for forgiveness and grace! Imagine going through life without the certitude of being at the same time sinners and acquitted! Who would want to get out of bed in the morning under those circumstances? Who would want to take care of their children, mend somebody else’s car, drill somebody’s tooth, or draw a cool beer for a thirsty man?
Who would run for public office --- oops, isn’t that where Lutherans have become as squeamish as the Old Order Mennonites? Perhaps at the very moment you are reading this, a ground-breaking forum will be held Nov. 3-4 on the Campus of Concordia Seminary in St. Louis. It will try to address precisely this issue – the reluctance of Lutherans in America to confront our increasingly complicated reality.
Called to Engage the Postmodern World – The Lutheran Voice in Contemporary America, reads the title of this two-day conference, which surpasses the usual scope of a divinity school. Consider the theme one of the lectures: “Where is Luther now that we need him?” asks Dr. Harold O.J. Brown, a renowned professor at Reformed Theological Seminary in Charlotte, NC, and co-founder of the initiative Evangelicals and Catholics Together.
Indeed, where is Luther? Where is Luther’s pragmatic voice in this confused global environment where everybody from radical Muslims to befuddled, wayward Episcopalians seems to be “cooking and brewing the kingdoms together,” to use Luther’s dictum; he saw the devil at work where this occurs.
We Lutherans have it all – the right doctrine, even the right institutions. We have excellent schools that could prepare the next generation to take on the world. We have universities that could produce the best and most responsible journalists if only they woke up to that need. We have people with money – if only they’d put it where Luther’s mouth was.
Luther’s voice should come with an American accent, proposes Dr. Mark A. Noll, the great evangelical historian teaching at the University of Notre Dame, who as the keynote speaker at the Concordia Forum emphasizes the “Need for a Lutheran Perspective on Christianity and Politics.”
It’s more than a dozen years that Noll and similar great minds have told the oldest Protestant tradition that it was time to open up its theological treasure chest, knowing that if you share spiritual gems they do not diminish but actually multiply.
Here’s what Noll says about Luther: “In his voice we hear uncommon resonances of the voice of God.” If this is so – and I believe it is – then it is time for all of us to stop playing Amish, quit the sidelines, open our ears, listen to Luther, roll up our sleeves and start dirtying our hands. We are needed.
--0--
Dr. Uwe Siemon-Netto is director of the Concordia Seminary Institute on Lay Vocation, St. Louis.
I'm a Lutheran and theological junkie so I thought I'd wish all you guys a Happy Reformation Day! It's the day Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the cathedral in Wittenberg setting in motion the Reformation which would reshape Western civilization. Amazing.
Reformation Day
Reformation Day is a religious holiday celebrated in remembrance of the Reformation, particularly by Lutheran and Reformed church communities. It takes place on October 31 and is an official holiday in many countries. It coincides with Halloween, the eve before All Saints' Day.
On this day in 1517, Martin Luther posted a proposal at the doors of a church in Wittenberg, Germany to debate the doctrine and practice of indulgences. This proposal is popularly known as the 95 Theses, which he nailed to the Castle Church doors. This was not an act of defiance or provocation as is sometimes thought. Since the Castle Church faced Wittenberg's main thoroughfare, the church door functioned as a public bulletin board and was therefore the logical place for posting important notices. Nonetheless, the event created a controversy between Luther and those allied with the Pope over a variety of doctrines and practices. When Luther and his supporters were excommunicated in 1520, the Lutheran, Reformed and Anabaptist traditions were born.
Within the Lutheran church, Reformation Day is considered a minor festival, and is officially referred to as The Festival of the Reformation. Until the 20th Century, most Lutheran churches celebrated Reformation Day on October 31st, regardless of which day of the week it occurred. Today, most Lutheran churches transfer the festival, so that it falls on the Sunday (called Reformation Sunday) on or before October 31st and transfer All Saints' Day to the Sunday on or after November 1st.
The liturgical color of the day is red, which represents the Holy Spirit and the Martyrs of the Christian Church. Luther's hymn, A Mighty Fortress is our God is traditionally sung on this day. Lutherans customarily stand during the hymn, in memory of its use in the religious wars of the Sixteenth Century.
It is also traditional in some Lutheran schools for schoolchildren to hold Reformation Day plays or pageants that re-enact scenes from the life of Martin Luther.
Great post over at Beggars All on Justification - -
Beggars All: The Crucial Creation/Justification Link
Cranach -- The blog of Gene Edward Veith: "Controlling the future/Changing the past
The discussion of vows reminded me of something I heard in a sermon long ago:
The one way to control the future is to make a promise.
The one way to change the past is to forgive."
I wonder why I post stuff up anymore anyway? I don't think ANYONE actually reads anything, but alas if someone stumbles here I'm attaching a link to a very interesting article in today's NYTIMES. It actually displaced that crazy what Shamu taught me about relationships article as the most viewed article today. There maybe a connection between that Shamu article and the one below and if there is it's probably got to do with low anthropology. Check it out.
He Who Cast the First Stone Probably Didn’t - New York Times
Arminianism & Semi-Pelagianism: "
'What the Arminian wants to do is to arouse man's activity: what we want to do is to kill it once for all---to show him that he is lost and ruined, and that his activities are not now at all equal to the work of conversion; that he must look upward. They seek to make the man stand up: we seek to bring him down, and make him feel that there he lies in the hand of God, and that his business is to submit himself to God, and cry aloud, 'Lord, save, or we perish.' We hold that man is never so near grace as when he begins to feel he can do nothing at all. When he says, 'I can pray, I can believe, I can do this, and I can do the other,' marks of self-sufficiency and arrogance are on his brow.'
- C. H. Spurgeon"
I've been checking out the Mars Hill on the web for the better part of the last year. Mark Driscoll - their Senior Pastor is doing some great things - check out his interview in Chrisitanity Today. He's like a younger more profane Tim Keller out in Seattle.
Men Are from Mars Hill - Christianity Today Magazine:
"Are young people becoming more sympathetic to Reformed theology?
The two hot theologies today are Reformed and emerging. Reformed theology offers certainty, with a masculine God who names our sin, crushes Jesus on the Cross for it, and sends us to hell if we fail to repent. Emerging theology offers obscurity, with a neutered God who would not say an unkind word to us, did not crush Jesus for our sins, and would not send anyone to hell. I came to Reformed theology by preaching through books of the Bible such as Exodus, Romans, John, and Revelation, along with continually repenting of my sin. I am, however, a boxers, not briefs, Reformed guy. I am pretty laid back about it and not uptight and tidy like many Reformed guys."
The New Criterion — The forgotten founder: John Witherspoon:
"Who is the most unfairly neglected American Founding Father? You might think that none can be unfairly neglected, so many books about that distinguished coterie have been published lately. John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Washington—whom have I left out? It has been a literary festival of Founders these last few years, and a good thing, too. But there is one figure, I believe, who has yet to get his due, and that is John Witherspoon (1723–1794). This Scotch Presbyterian divine came to America to preside over a distressed college in Princeton, New Jersey, and wound up transmitting to the colonies critical principles of the Scottish Enlightenment and helped to preside over the birth and consolidation of American independence."
Big Words of the Bible
As discussed on the 9/11/05 edition of The White Horse Inn
Repentance (Gk. meta-noia) Literally, the Greek word underlying repentance means "change of mind." Another similar Greek word is meta-melomai, which is best translated change of feeling, or "regret." Thus the underlying word for repentance is somewhat distinct from feeling sorry, etc., but primarily has to do with a change of mind which results in new actions. For example, in Luke 3:3 Jesus says to "Bear fruits in keeping with repentance." This statement does not make sense if repentance is interepreted as "doing acts of penance," for why would one need to add good works to the act of doing good works? The sense of this passage then is to bear fruit in keeping with a new outlook, having been converted to God's way of seeing the world. Finally, as with faith, repentance is spoken of in the NT as being a gift of God. See for example Acts 11:18, "to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”
Conversion (Gk. epistrophe). Turning, returning. From the New Schaff Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: "The noun (found in Acts 15:3) denotes both the act in which a man turns again to God and the Divine activity by virtue of which this takes place." See for example Jer. 31:18 "Turn thou me and I shall be turned."
Propitiation (Gk. hilasmos). To turn aside wrath. To appease. The word is a close cousin of the adjective hilaron, meaning "cheerful" (the Greek root of our modern English word "hilarious"). From Webster: "The act of appeasing the wrath and conciliating the favor of an offended person; the act of making propitious." There are six primary NT texts in which a the term is found (Luke 18:13, Rom. 3:25, Heb. 2:17, 9:5, 1John 2:2, and 4:10). In the Romans 3 passage, the form of the noun Paul uses is hilasterion, which is the term used in Greek translations of the OT to translate "mercy-seat," the place on which the blood of sacrifice was to be sprinkled (Lev. 16:12-17) in the inner shrine of the ancient Jewish temple. In fact the only other place this form of the word occurs in the NT is Heb. 9:5, where it is generally translated "mercy-seat." Most therefore see hilasmos as the "act of propitiation" and hilasterion as "the place of propitiation." Paul, then, in Rom. 3:25 appears to be suggesting that Christ is the ultimate mercy-seat, or place in which God's wrath has been turned aside from us. The verbal form hilaskomai is found in Heb. 2:17 and Luke 18:13. The Luke 18 passage is generally translated "God be merciful to me a sinner," but though the concepts of mercy and propitiation are closely related, a more accurate translation would be, "God, be propitious to me, a sinner." Some modern translations have unfortunately replaced the term propitiation with words such as "atonement" (NIV) to simply some of the Biblical terminology.
Expiation (Gk. katarismos). Purification or cleansing. See Hebrews 1:3b, "After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high" (ESV). From Webster's: "The act of making satisfaction or atonement for any crime or fault; the extinguishing of guilt by suffering or penalty." We get our modern word "catharsis / cathartic" from this Greek word underlying expiation. The RSV unfortunately uses expiation to translate hilosmos and hilasterion, but those terms would better be translated as propitiation, because it communicates more than purification, but also the appeasement of a wrathful God.
Redemption (Gk. apolutrosis). From BDAG: "Buying back a slave or captive, i.e. making free by payment of a ransom." From Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Theology: "The central theme of redemption in Scripture is that God has taken the initiative to act compassionately on behalf of those who are powerless to help themselves. The NT makes clear that divine redemption includes God's identification with humanity in its plight, and the securing of liberation of humankind through the obedience, suffering, death, and resurrection of the incarnate Son." See Heb. 9:12 and 1Cor. 6:19-20.
Imputation (Gk. logizomai). To credit, think, account or reckon. Though Christ was personally sinless, God treated him "as if" he were a sinner during his time on the cross. Thus, our sin was imputed or credited to his account. In the same way, we are personally sinful and unclean, but God credits us with the active and passive obedience of Christ, and treats us "as if" we are totally righteous. The means by which we receive this credit or imputation is not works, but simple trust in the finished work of Christ, as Paul teaches in Rom. 4:5, "to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness." Imputation then is the most crucial component of the doctrine of justification, which is itself the heart of the gospel.
Justification (Gk. dikaiow). To declare or pronounce righteous. God declares a sinner to be righteous the moment the sinner, despairing of his own inherent righteousness, clings to the righteousness of Christ as sufficient for presenting him to God as holy and without blame. It is a declaration, and not a process; it occurs at the beginning of the Christian life, not at the end; it is merited by Christ, not in any sense by the believer; it is complete, not partial; it is declared on the basis of Christs righteousness, not the believers, and it is received by faith alone, not by faith and obedience. The believing sinner is changed and will continue to change, but such changes effected by God in the soul are in no way the basis for justification. From Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Theology: "The verb translated 'to justify' clearly means 'to declare righteous.' It is used of God in a quotation, which the NIV renders 'So that you may be proved right when you speak' (Rom. 3:4); the NRSV has more exactly, 'So that you may be justified in your words.' Now God cannot be 'made righteous'; the expression obviously means 'shown to be righteous' and this helps us see that when the word is applied to believers it does not mean 'made righteous.'"
Sanctification (Gk. hagiazein). To make holy. With justification, we are declared righteous by God, not on the basis of what we have done, but because we are linked to the righteousness Christ by faith. But sanctification is the process in which we improve in holiness here and now. The former is the basis of our standing before God in heaven, the latter is earthly and always imperfect. A clear passage making this distinction is Hebrews 10:14: "by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." From A.A. Hodge: "Sanctification is the work of God's grace by which those who believe in Christ are freed from sin and built up in holiness. In Protestant theology it is distinguished from justification and regeneration, both of which lie at its root, and from neither of which is it separable in fact...both regeneration and justification are momentary acts, and acts of God in which the sinner is passive; sanctification, on the other hand, is a progressive work of God, in which the sinner co-operates."
Predestination (Gk. pro-oridzow). To decide in advance. From the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology: "Divine predestination means that God has a purpose that is determined long before it is brought to pass. It implies that God is infinitely capable of planning and then bringing about what he has planned, and Scripture speaks of him as doing this (Isa 14:24-27; 22:11; 37:26; 44:7-8; 46:8-10). Prophecy in its predictive mode is to be understood accordingly. God plans and makes his plans known, as he chooses, to his servants the prophets (Amos 3:7). God's purpose is one of love and grace (Deut 7:6-8; Isa 41:8-9), above all because in love he predestined what should come to pass in his plan to save and to restore sinful humanity through Christ (Eph 1:5). Colossians 1:26 speaks of this purpose as 'the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but now is disclosed.' This implies that all that is in God's good purpose for us, individually or as part of the people of God, is by God's initiative and thus is a work of grace, something that we could never instigate or deserve (Deut 9:4-6; 2 Tim 1:9)." See also Acts 13:48, Rom 8:29 - 9:24, and Eph 1:1-11.
Regeneration From A.A. Hodge: "A theological term used to express the initial stage of the change experienced by one who enters upon the Christian life. It is derived from the New Testament, where the "new birth" (1 Pet. 1:3, 23; Titus 3:5; John 3:3-21) is the beginning of that "renewal" which produces the "new creature." See also Acts 16:14: "One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.”
Gospel (Gk. euangelion). A proclamation of good news (Rom. 1:15-16). The greek root of gospel is the source of the words evangelism (the spreading of good news) and evangelical (one who is gospel centered). It is important to bear in mind here that the word clearly indicates that actual historical events are at the core of the Christian faith. The original disciples were proclaiming good news and were reporting events that actually happened, not eternal principles or mystical speculations (see 2Pet 1:16, 1John 1-3, 1Cor. 15:1-17). From Louw & Nida: "In a number of languages the expression ‘the gospel’ or ‘the good news’ must be rendered by a phrase, for example, ‘news that makes one happy’ or ‘information that causes one joy’ or ‘words that bring smiles’ or ‘a message that causes the heart to be sweet.’"
It's been a while since I've posted anything on this blog (not that anyone actually reads it anyway). I ran across this frightening yet not suprising article about Oprah and her cult following/cult influence. I think it is further evidence of what Stanly Bloom classified as the gnostic religion of America. Ugh.
USATODAY.com - The divine Miss Winfrey?
An interesting read from an old Issues, Etc. .. (if anyone actually reads this blog)
Issues, Etc. Journal - Spring 1998 - Vol. 3 No. 1
Hitting For The Cycle
What is sanctification? How is it produced? To grow in our Christian faith and life, do we simply go in circles and do the same things over and over again? You got it!
On a recent Issues, Etc. interview, we discussed the subject of sanctification. My guest, a Reformed theologian, compared the various views on sanctification with a wind-up doll. When you wind-up the Pentecostal doll, it speaks in tongues. The Reformed doll grabs the third use of the Law. The Holiness doll goes after perfect sanctification. And what about the Lutheran doll? Well, from his perspective, when you wind-up the Lutheran doll it simply goes in circles.
As a Park Sloper, I'm sad to say I'm not completely suprised by this nonsense, but it makes for an interesting read nonetheless. Check the below link to the article in Gawker.
The Park Slope Hat Spat: Read All the Emails - Gawker:
" few weeks ago, a member of the Park Slope Parents e-mail forum who’d encountered a stray piece of winterwear in the neighborhood posted a notice to the group titled “Found: boy’s hat.” … [S]ubscriber “Lisa” went public with her problems regarding the gender-specifying description of the hat. Wondering how such a categorization would feel to a spiky-hat-wearing girl, Lisa wrote, “It’s innocent little comments like this that I find the most hurtful.” A third member responded soon after, saying such political correctness drove her “up the wall,” and a heated discussion ensued. Lisa’s supporters questioned their opponents’ commitment to “the free interchange of ideas and questions” … while an opposing faction expressed facetious dismay that the original poster, who had described the hat as likely belonging to “an older child,” was not more considerate toward “younger children who happen to have large heads.” … [O]ne poster questioned the use of “hat,” asking if the object might be more sensitively labeled a “soft, porous bowl.”
It’s all pleasantly, kookily amusing, right? Not quite. In summarized form, yes, it’s amusing enough. But we had a chance to read the entire exchange — stretching on for days, with charges of political correctness and anti-political correctness, sexism and stereotyping — and we’re much less amused. The whole thing is after the jump; prepare to be intrigued, amazed, disgusted — and quite certain you could never, ever be paid enough to move out there."
The Park Slope Hat Spat: Read All the Emails - Gawker:
Mark: 8:31-39
31He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. 32He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.
33But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. "Get behind me, Satan!" he said. "You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."
34Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 35For whoever wants to save his life[a] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it. 36What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? 37Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? 38If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels."
I was thinking about the text, and specifically 'he must deny himself and take up his cross'. I've been reading the AA Big Book, and lo and behold AA has a lot to say about this 'denial'. AA is strong on the diagosis of sin - ie that our problems 'arise out of ourselves' - that we're selfish and self-seeking, etc. . . We're given a 'daily reprive contingent upon the maintance of our spiritual condition' - and 'our very lives as ex-problem drinkers depend upon our constant thought of others and how we may help meet their needs.' The denial of self boils down to service - that we've been given a second chance on life to help others - not to win a bunch of cash and prizes or to have this 'glorious life' - but to help those who still suffer. It's about serving others; not ourselves - though by servicing others we too are served - another paradox!
It's all a big Chrisitan microchosim - we're saved by grace to serve others by proclaiming the good news (in aa speak - to proclaim that there is a solution to the alcoholic who still suffers...) I think the denial is that which pushes us out and away from our own natural an innate wiring that seeks to serve ourselves. (to be self-justifying/our own Gods as it were) Our default mode as drunks (sinners) is to do for ourselves at the expense of everyone else. For the alcoholic this is life threating,b/c the more it becomes about self again - the closer he is to another drink - and to drink is to die. Drunks get to see the mortal consequences of sin up close and personal. Intense.
So much of the AA solution is about admitting a 'lack of power' (Lack of power, that was our dilemma. We had to find a power by which we could live, and it had to be a Power greater than ourselves.p.45) It's amazing that the solution to the drink is focused on service. Doing the inventory to look at resetnements/fear/past sex conduct - is all about revealing where the drunk is wrong; where he is self-propelled - and pushes him to make 'amends' - to clear wreckage so we can serve others. Pretty cool.
Anyway, I'm rambling a bit, but I guess the crux of what I'm getting at is I think the 'deny himself' is much much deeper than the denial of worldly or physical comforts, but really hits us where it hurts - the denial of our intrisic selfish/self-seeking comforts-the deinal of our own self-diefication or self justification. I see it a lot in marriage - 'love your wife as Christ loved the church' - self sacrifical love - service that hurts - esp. when I WANT to be right/justified.
Some selected excerpts from the "Big Book"
The AA Eleventh Step Prayer a.k.a. St. Francis Prayer
Lord, make me a channel of thy peace
That where there is hatred I may bring love
That where there is wrong I may bring the spirit of forgiveness
That where there is discord, I may bring harmony
That where there is error, I may bring truth
That where there is doubt, I may bring faith
That where there is despair, I may bring hope
That where there are shadows, I may bring light
That where there is sadness, I may bring joy.
Lord, grant that I may seek rather
to comfort than to be comforted
to understand than to be undersdood
to love than to be loved.
For it is by self-forgetting that one finds. It is by forgiving that one is forgiven. It is by dying that one awakens to eternal life.
Amen. (AA 12 & 12 p.99)
Our very lives, as ex-problem drinkers, depend upon our constant thought of others and how we may help meet their needs. p.20
Our real purpose is to fit ourselves to be of maximum service to God and the people about us. p.77
-------------------------------------------
Selfishness, self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably
find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt.
So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own
making. They arise out of ourselves, (ie SIN - my emphasis TB) and the alcoholic is an extreme example of self-will run riot, though he usually doesn't think so. Above everything, we alcoholics must be rid of this selfishness. We must, or it kill us! God makes that possible. And there often seems no way of entirely getting rid of self without His aid. Many of us had moral and philosophical convictions galore, but we could not live up to them even though we would have liked to. Neither could we reduce our self-centeredness much by wishing or trying on our own power. We had to have God's help.
This is the how and the why of it. First of all, we had to quit playing God. It didn't work. Next, we decided that hereafter in this drama of life, God was going to be our Director. He is the Principal; we are His agents. He is the Father, and we are His children. Most Good ideas are simple, and this concept was the keystone of the new and triumphant arch through which we passed to freedom. p.62
----------------------------------------------
Simple, but not easy; a price had to be paid. It meant destruction of self-centeredness. I must turn in all things to the Father of Light who presides over us all.
These were revolutionary and drastic proposals, but the moment I fully accepted them, the effect was electric. There was a sense of victory, followed by such a peace and serenity as I had never know. There was utter confidence. I felt lifted up, as though the great clean wind of a
mountain top blew through and through. God comes to most men gradually, but His impact on me was sudden and profound.p.14
________________________
My friend had emphasized the absolute necessity of demonstrating these principles in all my affairs. Particularly was it imperative to work with others as he had worked with me. Faith without works was dead, he said. And how appallingly true for the alcoholic! For if an alcoholic failed to perfect and enlarge hisspiritual life through work and self-sacrifice for others, he could not survive the certain trials and low spots ahead. If
he did not work, he would surely drink again, and if he drank, he would surely die. Then faith would be dead indeed. With us it is just like that. pp 14-15
_____________________________
Despite all we can say, many who are real alcoholics are not going to believe they are in that class. By every form of self-deception and experimentation, they will try to prove themselves exceptions to the rule, therefore nonalcoholic.p.31
_________________________
I saw that will power and self-knowledge would not help in those strange mental blank spots.p.42
But the actual or potential alcoholic, with hardly any exception, will be absolutely unable to stop drinking on the basis of self-knowledge .p.39
When we became alcoholics, crushed by a self-imposed crises we could not postpone or evade, we had to fearlessly face the proposition that either God is everything or else He is nothing.p.53
The first requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success. On that basis we are almost always in collision with something or somebody, even though our motives are good. Most people try to live by self-propulsion. Each person is like an actor who wants to run the whole show; is forever trying to arrange the lights, the ballet, the scenery and the rest of the players in his own way. If his arrangements would only stay put, if only people would do as he wished, the show would be great. Everybody,including himself, would be pleased. Life would be wonderful. In trying to make these arrangements our actor may sometimes be quite virtuous. He may be kind, considerate, patient, generous; even modest and self-sacrificing. On the other hand, he may be mean, egotistical, selfish and dishonest. But, as with most humans, he is more likely to have varied traits.
What usually happens? The show doesn't come off very well. He begins to think life doesn't treat him right.He decides to exert himself more. He becomes, on the next occasion, still more demanding or gracious, as the case may be. Still the play does not suit him. Admitting he may be somewhat at fault, he is sure that other people are more to blame. He becomes angry, indignant, self-pitying. What is his basic trouble? Is he not really a
self-seeker even when trying to be kind? Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well? Is it not evident to all the rest of the players that these are the things he wants? And do not his actions make each
of them wish to retaliate, snatching all they can get out of the show? Is he not, even in his best moments, a producer of confusion rather than harmony?
Our actor is self-centered -- ego-centric, as people like to call it nowadays. He is like the retired business man who lolls in the Florida sunshine in the winter complaining of the sad state of the nation; the minister who sighs over the sins of the twentieth century; politicians and reformers who are sure all would be Utopia if the rest of the world would only behave; the outlaw safe cracker who thinks society has wronged him; and the alcoholic who has lost all and is locked up. Whatever our protestations, are not most of us concerned with ourselves, our resentments, or our self-pity? pp 61-62
Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. p62
Before we begin (our day), we ask God to direct our thinking, especially asking that it be divorced from self-pity, dishonest or self-seeking motives. p86
It is easy to let up on the spiritual program of action and rest on our laurels. We are headed for trouble if we do, for alcohol is a subtle foe. We are not cured of alcoholism. What we really have is a daily reprieve contingent on the maintenance of our spiritual condition.Every day is a day when we must carry the vision of God's will into all of our activities. "How can I best serve Thee, Thy will (not mine) be done." These are thoughts which must go with us constantly. We can exercise our will power along this line all we wish. It is the proper use of the will. p.85
BMW is finally releasing a new line of more 'afforable' mid range 800cc bikes. Their new 1200 twins are bikes I'm just in love with, but at almost 17K out the door, I don't predict there will be any new 1200 twins in my life in the near future (unless I some how score a new gig that is willing to pay me ridiculous amounts of cash).
These new 800 twins, however are another story. At less than 9K, the value proposition becomes a little more 'attainable'. My old R1100S was my dream bike (never should've sold that bike!), and it looks like this new 800S is like it's little brother. I'm excited to take one for a spin when they hit the dealers later this summer!
Click for Article
If you haven't listened to this show, I couldn't recommend it more highly. It is by far the most consistent and engaging theological resource I've used. They now have FREE PODCASTS for all you iTunes users. Check it. . .
The White Horse Inn
2 Great Posts from incarnatus est on Lutheran vs. Catholic Theological Differences
0 comments Posted by Mr. T at 3:58 PMBelow are 2 great positings I read on incarnatus est.
Enjoy (if anyone is reading),
Tom
Its crucial : At the same time saint and sinner
From Diane Hampson, Christian Contradictions, p. 24-25.The formula "simul iustus et peccator" encapsulates the structure of Lutheran thought. As we have seen, the Christian lives by Christ's righteousness, a righteousness which is extrinsic to him. Thus he is, at one and the same time, both a sinner (in himself) but also righteous (in that he lives by God's righteousness). Heiko Oberman expresses this in a helpful manner. Righteousness is not one's property; but one's possession.
For example, the book that I have out of the library is in my possession but not my property… Thus the extra nos shows that justification is not based on a claim of man, on a debitum iustitiae. Another way of putting this is simply to say that God accepts the human just as he is for Christ's sake and that which man is -at least in relation to God - is a sinner.
This for Luther is the message of the gospel, overturning our presupposition that we have first to be good before we can be accepted by God.
What it is important to notice, particularly in view of the debate with Catholicism, is that iustus and peccator are relational terms and we are involved in a relational understanding of what it is to be justified, There is a sense in which neither term refers to the inward 'state' of the person. Certainly neither is to be understood as a quality which could be predicated of the human, understood as a substantial entity.
On the one hand God, for Christ's sake, holds the sinner to be just; he acquits us … Thus we may say that we are indeed to be considered fully just. On the other hand when the human is placed coram deo (before God), faced with God's goodness he must necessarily judge himself a sinner. But again it is not so much that the human is a sinner in himself. It is not that there is nothing good in the human. It is simply that when one considers the nature of God, the human cannot bring anything to God, on account of which God could accept him. In relation to God, he must count himself a sinner. The human thus has a double sense of himself; as both fully just and yet also as a sinner.
http://incarnatusest.blogspot.com/2006/04/its-crucial-at-same-time-saint-and.html
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Its Crucial #2
Are we righteous before God because we have been placed on "the way" by God and so eventually will arrive at righteousness or are we ( as Luther would have it) only by faith in a promise, not by supposing that someday God will help us by his grace actually be righteous.For Luther and Lutherans there is a contradiction and conflict at the heart of the Christian religion. The conflict is not one of purity (I must be pure, I must attain righteousness with God's help), it is the conflict of faith. God says that I am righteous and yet I can, see, know and feel I am not. The conflict is one over the Word and promise of God versus my sense of sinful self, not over my inner state which by work or acetic practice or the sacramental system of the church God purifies so He can then accept me. No, for Luther, God says, Sinner, I accept you. Thus the conflict.
Again, Hampson in Christian Contradictions(p. 25):
We can express the Lutheran simul in another way; which is present in the quotation which we have just given. The Christian has a double sense of time. He lives 'from' the future, in that his sense of himself now is derived from his sense of Christ. The future is not placed at the end of a via, a path, which consists in his own transformation. Rather -to repeat myself -the Christian lives 'from' that future, for his sense of himself is bound up with that future. It is in this sense that Luther is future orientated. The Christian bases himself on something which is not at his disposal, of which he knows through the promise. Thus the Christian lives by a kind of a dare, which is the nature of faith. He holds in faith to what is scarcely credible, that God accepts him fully and completely for Christ's sake.
In this sense he believes against reason and on the ground of the revelation alone. Faith is eschatalogical in that through belief in that other future it is actualised in the present. Yet, while the Christian knows himself as accepted and living from that future, he is struggling with his present condition in the world. The Lutheran simul iustus et peccator thus brings with it a double sense not only of self but of time … Clearly it is a quite different sense of time from the Catholic, in which the human is at one 'place' (to put it figuratively) on the via which leads from the present to the future.
http://incarnatusest.blogspot.com/2006/04/its-crucial-at-same-time-saint-and.html
Click Here - - woman has perfect memory
spiked-health | Article | The stigma of smoking:
Excerpt - -
"It is a sign of the times that there has been no storm of protest over the increasingly manipulative and moralistic character of anti-smoking propaganda. In the crusade to reduce mortality from smoking it is considered legitimate to exploit the deepest fears of parents and children. While the law seeks to prohibit smoking in public, the new anti-smoking advert seeks to proscribe it in the private sphere, fomenting domestic strife to achieve this objective. At a time when a wide range of civil liberties are under threat it is alarming that the strategy of using children to police their parents' behaviour - reminiscent of totalitarian regimes - provokes so little public disquiet."
The Happiest Wives - New York Times:
"From the 1960's through the 80's, wives cut back on housework as husbands did more. In the 1990's, though, the equalizing trend leveled off, leaving wives still doing nearly twice as much of the work at home.
That seems terribly unfair unless you look at how men and women behave when they're living by themselves: the women do twice as much housework as the men do. Single men do less cooking and cleaning, because those jobs don't seem as important to them. They can live with unmade beds and frozen dinners.
Similarly, there's a gender gap in enthusiasm for some outside jobs. Men are much more willing to take a job that pays a premium in exchange for long hours away from home or the risk of being killed. The extra money doesn't seem as important to women.
In a more egalitarian world, there would be more wives mining coal and driving trucks, and more husbands cooking dinners and taking children to doctor's appointments. But that wouldn't be a fairer world, as Nock and Wilcox found.
The happiest wives in their study were the ones who said that housework was divided fairly between them and their husbands. But those same happy wives also did more of the work at home while their husbands did more work outside home. Nock doesn't claim to have divined the feminine soul, but he does have one answer to Freud's question.
'A woman wants equity,' he says. 'That's not necessarily the same as equality.'"
This guy is a marketing GENUIS, and he doesn't have an MBA - put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Live from the Steve Jobs Keynote -- "Fun new products" - Engadget
Click here to read the whole article
An excerpt:
"In the minds of at least some vocal members of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, expressing such politically incorrect views is the academic equivalent of provoking Islamic extremists by depicting Prophet Mohammed in a political cartoon. Radical academics do not, of course, burn down buildings, at least not since the 1970s. Instead they introduce motions of no confidence and demand resignations of those who offend their sensibilities (while insisting on complete freedom of speech for those with whom they agree -- free speech for me but not for thee!)."
After nearly seven days of elevating the Cheney bird-hunting accident to the level of a national crisis, now comes this week's flap over managing the ports. To be sure, the matter of secure U.S. ports trumps the hunting of quail as an affaire d'état. But it was the strikingly low quality of the politicians' commentary and behavior that attracted notice.
A good piece on Larry Summers. Inmates running the asylum?
Townhall.com :: Columns :: R.I.P. Harvard President Lawrence Summers by Ben Shapiro - Feb 22, 2006
Wierd story - it's not too often you have CEOs lying about getting theological degrees. Harvard B-School or Wharton maybe, but Pacific Coast Baptist College? This guy must be one heck of a salesman.
USATODAY.com - RadioShack CEO lied on resume: "e CEO said he now believes he received a ThG diploma, which is awarded for completing a three-year degree in theology. Errors in Edmondson's resume were first reported earlier this week by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram."
An interesting op-ed from boston.com on the church burnings in Alabama.
The flames of hate in Alabama - The Boston Globe:
"Suppose that vandals last month had attacked 10 Detroit-area mosques and halal restaurants, leaving behind shattered windows, wrecked furniture, and walls defaced with graffiti. The violence would be national front-page news. On blogs and talk radio, the horrifying outbreak of anti-Muslim bigotry would be Topic No. 1. Bills would be introduced in Congress to increase the penalties for violent ''hate crimes' -- no one would hesitate to call them by that term -- and millions of Americans would rally in solidarity with Detroit's Islamic community."
A Review of Beth Moore's Believing God: "Basically she says, don’t let theology and doctrine confuse you when you can figure it out with God for yourself in a way that works for you. Unfortunately, people who use her materials can’t help but absorb some of that reasoning. Even more troubling is that they think they’re doing Bible study when they are really getting a heavy dose of mysticism, storytelling, psychology, and prosperity gospel. In the introduction to Believing God, Moore shows her true, but mistaken, agenda when she says, “I know I’m going to make it to heaven because I’ve trusted Christ as my Savior, but I want to make it to my Canaan on the way. I want to finish my race in the Promised Land, not in the wilderness. You too? Then we have to cash in our fear and complacency and spend all we have on the only ticket out: BELIEF.”"
A great article in the Washington Post - make me think of the old adage - 'self knowldege avails us nothing.' This writer has a low anthropology & I like it.
Here's an excerpt - -
"Of course, some good may come out of this story, even in this country. If nothing else, this controversy should bring an end to that naive, charming and sadly incorrect American theory of international relations that "the more we all learn about one another, the less we will fight." Gradually, the Islamic world is learning that we don't respect religion in the same manner they do. Slowly, we are learning that they feel differently about the printed word, and the printed picture, from us. And somehow, I've got a feeling that this new knowledge will be not the beginning of understanding but the inspiration for more violence"
Click to read the whole thing - A Cartoon's Portrait of America
I'll let this one speak for itself. Note the article on the bottom about the dwarf getting swallowed by a Hippo!
Naked Banker Fires Secretary :: Business News :: Here Is The City News :: The Latest Business & Financial Markets News And Views
Being mocked is Christ's work, not Muhammad's - Wretched of the Earth
I thought this was a great post from Gene Veith’s Cranch Blog today.
Questions for Cartoon Rioters
It's interesting to listen to Muslims explaining why they are rioting, burning, and demanding murder in response to the Danish cartoons. "You do not understand," they say, "how these pictures of the prophet offend Muslims." Yes, you are clearly VERY offended. But then it is surely a separate question to examine your behavior when you are offended. Why, when you are offended, are you rioting, burning, and murdering? As opposed to other reactions, such as just getting angry without hurting anyone, writing polemics against idolatry, praying for Allah's judgment, or vowing to separate from an infidel society? (Emphasis mine – TB)
Also, we now know that your religion forbids making images of the prophet. Muslims may not do this. But do you expect non-Muslims to follow Islamic teachings? The Q'uran forbids the eating of pork. So are the non-Muslims who do eat pork also insulting Islam?
And if your religion demands the idolaters be punished, then I can understand why you want to kill the cartoonists and the newspaper editors who published them. But why are you attacking Danes and even other Europeans who had no connection with the cartoons? The people working in the Danish embassies in Syria and Lebanon did not draw or publish the cartoons. Nor did that priest in Turkey who was killed--he wasn't even Danish--nor did those German tourists who were kidnapped. You are not harming the guilty by harming the innocen
It's been a while since I've posted, so since things have been slow I'm picking it up again . .
Being confessional when it hurts:
I saw this today on Cranch and thought I'd post it.
T
------------
Cranach -- The blog of Gene Edward Veith
One of my daughter's teachers, in a Lutheran school, once spoke out in class against the death penalty. So at home we talked about the issue. We looked at Romans 13, which gives the lawful authorities the office of 'bearing the sword' against evildoers. We also looked at the Augsburg Confession and the Apology (XVI), which affirm capital punishment and which all Lutheran teachers are pledged to uphold.
When my daughter the next day brought these texts to school, the teacher saw what Scripture and the Confessions teach and so she CHANGED HER POSITION. Even though she personally disapproved of capital punishment, she recognized that the practice must be legitimate anyway because the Bible says that it is. She believed the Bible not because she liked what it said but even though she did not. She reasoned that if she disagrees with something the Bible and the Confessions teach, then SHE must be wrong.
How often do we see that? The usual approach when confronted with an authority that puts forward a position we don't like is to question the authority or try to interpret it away so that we can be left with our personal preferences anyway. But this teacher showed herself to be a true Bible-believing Christian and a genuinely confessional Lutheran."