Why do you go to church?

This definately falls into the “don’t know whether to laugh or cry” category, but watch this video, and you’ll see what I mean.

But there is an important point here, isn’t there? Rather than point the finger at churches, let’s examine our own hearts. Why do you go to church? I’m sure you could give me some answers: fellowship, worship, hearing the Word read and preached. You probably know Acts 2:42 well enough to know that your answer correspond very closely to that text. And so it should.

But let’s me a bit more specific. Why did you go to church yesterday? Habit? Do take part in the service or some ministry? To meet friends? Because it was Sunday?

It’s easy to lose the big picture on a day-to-day basis, isn’t it? It would be wonderful if I could tell you that yesterday I woke up bright and early, delighted that it was the Lord’s Day, and I could spend a day set apart, worshipping Him, being with His people, speaking to others about Him, praying to Him, giving to Him, serving Him. Instead, I woke up wondering vaguely whether how many times I could afford to press the snooze button on the alarm clock.

Acts 2:42 does not only tell us how the church should behave – it tells us how we should respond. So if by the grace of God we are fortunate enough to go to a God-centered church, let’s “be filled with awe”, let’s “continue to meet together” – midweek as well as the Lord’s day. Let’s ensure we have “glad and sincere hearts”. Let’s “praise God”. And let’s do that every Sunday!

Wooing, waiting and winning (Song of Songs #2b)

Over the past few days we’ve been looking at Song of Songs. In the introduction I explained there were six scenes in the song, and we have started to go through the first scene. I described this first scene as wooing, waiting and winning which describes the Shulammite woman and her quest to win Solomon’s heart. Last time around we left them on their first date, lying in the verdant grass, staring up at the fir trees above them.

2:1-2: And what does this do for the woman? It fills her with confidence: She was “darkened by the sun”, but now she is “a rose of Sharon, a lily of the valleys”. Men, we have a real responsibility for our girls. Because Solomon has accepted her for who she is, she has confidence in herself. And it gets better, because Solomon disagrees with her. You’re not a lily, he says to her. You’re the lily, “a lily among thorns”. Not very fair on the groupies, but he wants her to be confident that it’s only her. Even on this first date, and this very early stage, he wants her to know that she’s the only one for him. Remember: if your girl or boy is only a lily among lilies – then don’t go out together. Wait. A lily among thorns – that’s the right time.
[Read more...]

Response to “To be continued?” #2

In an earlier post, I looked at the opening chapter of Sam Waldon’s To Be Continued?. Waldron is arguing for the cessation of the miraculous gifts with what he calls the ‘cascade argument’. He first seeks to demonstrate that the gift of apostleship has ceased, and then cascades that argument down to the the gift of prophecy, tongue-speaking, and finally miracle-working.

In my earlier post I argued that this line of reasoning was not valid for two key reasons. First, Waldon does not demonstrate that apostleship is a spiritual gift. Second, even if we accept that apostleship is a spiritual gift that has ceased, that would not of itself preclude other spiritual gifts continuing. After all, Waldron only believes that miraculous gifts have ceased, rather than all spiritual gifts. A continuationist could use just the same logic as Waldron to argue that all the foundational gifts have ceased, rather than all the miraculous ones.

So then, to the next chapters of Waldron’s book:
[Read more...]

God and Quantumn Mechanics

We seem to be in one of those anti-Christian phases that the UK media goes through every now and again. (Not that they are ever pro-Christian, of course, but I think you know what I mean.) First there is David Starkey’s Who Killed Christianity? on Radio 4. Although each programme is mercifully only 15 minutes long, it has already raised my hackles and we’re only halfway through the four-part series. What serious contribution to theology does an historial and expert on the constitution think he can make? And I thought I was self-opinionated.

Perhaps more serious is the continuation of Richard Dawkins all-out assault on God. Channel4 tell us that in His latest TV programme he “describes God as the most unpleasant fictional character of all and launches a wholehearted attack on religion as the cause for much of the pain and suffering in the world.” So much for fair play, then. But what disturbs me most about Dawkins’ rant is not his bad theology, it’s his bad science. Dawkins is an evolutionary-biologist, and for him science is everything. Here’s a quote from his own website:

Either there is evidence for a god (in which case you would not “accept the scientific account of reality” because the scientific account of reality would have been found wanting. That is what evidence would mean).

His point there is simple: You cannot prove that God is (so He cannot exist), and the scientific account of reality has not been found wanting (so you can trust that). It’s clear Dawkins doesn’t know God. It’s clear too, he doesn’t know his science. Science can’t (and probably will never) actually explain very much at all. The more you find out, the more you realise you do not know. And as physics in particular advances, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle states that this is a great deal that is actually unknowable.
[Read more...]

Wooing, waiting and winning (Song of Songs #2a)

In the introduction to Song of Songs I explained that the book is a story, set in six scenes that describe the development of the relationship between Solomon and his unnamed lover – the Shulammite woman (6:13).

The first scene I’ve described as wooing, waiting and winning. Here is the Shulammite woman in her quest to win her man. It’s the longest of the seven scenes in the book – three chapters (1:1-3:5). So rather than try and cover everything in one post, I’ll split this first scene up.

All I’m going to do in this and future posts is to retell the story in the text, and make a few applications as I go along. It would be good for you to have a Bible handy.

Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth—
for your love is more delightful than wine.
Pleasing is the fragrance of your perfumes;
your name is like perfume poured out.
No wonder the maidens love you!
Take me away with you—let us hurry!
Let the king bring me into his chambers. (1:1-4)

[Read more...]

Song of Songs: Introduction

Over the next few weeks I plan to provide an overview of Song of Songs. The aim is a practical exposition which helps with the sticky questions of courtships and relationships before and during marriage. I guess in my mind that it’s aimed specifically at young people (after all, most of the events described seem to happen when Solomon and the Shulamite woman were quite young). Today, I’ll just give you an introduction.

For those not familiar with it, Song of Songs is a series of poems that tell the story of two lovers: Solomon, and a lady we call the Shulamite woman. The book is almost entirely their own words, though just occassionally a few others add their own thoughts. It was written by Solomon, and the events described took place around 965BC, nearly 3,000 years ago.

If you have an old translation of the Bible (particularly an AV), then Song of Songs is going to be very hard to read. Not because of the old-fashioned language, but because it will be very hard to work out who is saying what to whom. When the text said “Let him kiss me”, then we know that it must be the woman who is speaking (because she says ‘him’). But what about the next verse? “Your name is like perfume poured out”. In English it’s impossible to tell (though we can guess). But because the Hebrew language is more precise when it comes to gender, the original readers would be able to tell. That’s how modern translations are able to add these nice headings that explain who is speaking and make everything much clearer. The headings are not inspired though, so occassionally they could be wrong.
[Read more...]

Tim Challies down and out? ;-)

Challies.com was very slow last night, so I tried again this morning, only to be greeted with this:
Account suspended
Given that Tim has recently admitted that’s he’s been accused of not being a Christian, I’m sure conspiracy theorists will have a field day. Or perhaps he has been raptured with the rest of us left behind? ;-)

Come back soon, Tim!