So. Who really believes that?
I found myself bopping my head to Stellar Kart's "Life is Good" song.
The chorus comes on:
Life is good
Eternal life is better
That in combination with my Uncle's Easter sermon:
We are living the resurrected life NOW.
And I realized that I've been complaining about how much life sucks. A lot. As my uncle would put it, I've been living a "Good Friday life". Christ died for me and calls me to die to myself with him. However, Christ resurrected and I am resurrected in him. So why am I living like this?
Its true. Life is good. Eternal life is better.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Thursday, March 27, 2008
I am not skilled to understand
This is normally the kind of post for my other blog, but I figured I'd share...
I downloaded this song a while ago, but I just synced my ipod to get it just yesterday morning...the day I started my Job study. The song?
My Savior, My God
I am not skilled to understand
What God has willed, what God has planned
I only know that at his right hand
Stands one who is my Savior
I take him at his word and live
Christ died for me, this I read
And in my heart, I find the need
Of him to be my Savior
That he would leave his place on high
And come for sinful man to die
You count it strange, so once did I
Before I knew my Savior
Needless to say, I love that song...and its so true...I'm NOT skilled to understand just how incredibly marvelous and big and powerful he is. I have no knowledge of his plans, no idea what he has in store, and absolutely no fathomable idea of how much he truly loves me.
There is no amount of reason or logic to argue my way into his thinking.
There is only one way to go...and that is this:
Trust that he is just and loving and good and perfect.
As long as things are in his hands, nothing can go wrong, right? Even though it feels like everything crumbles around us every day, we can rest assured that he is in control and he has a plan.
I downloaded this song a while ago, but I just synced my ipod to get it just yesterday morning...the day I started my Job study. The song?
My Savior, My God
I am not skilled to understand
What God has willed, what God has planned
I only know that at his right hand
Stands one who is my Savior
I take him at his word and live
Christ died for me, this I read
And in my heart, I find the need
Of him to be my Savior
That he would leave his place on high
And come for sinful man to die
You count it strange, so once did I
Before I knew my Savior
Needless to say, I love that song...and its so true...I'm NOT skilled to understand just how incredibly marvelous and big and powerful he is. I have no knowledge of his plans, no idea what he has in store, and absolutely no fathomable idea of how much he truly loves me.
There is no amount of reason or logic to argue my way into his thinking.
There is only one way to go...and that is this:
Trust that he is just and loving and good and perfect.
As long as things are in his hands, nothing can go wrong, right? Even though it feels like everything crumbles around us every day, we can rest assured that he is in control and he has a plan.
Job
I'm currently doing a study on Job right now and am writing my daily chapter studies up on my other blog.
When I am complete, I will condense it, take the major points, and perhaps write about it here. The other blog is a bit more personal and not as critically minded as this one, so travel there at your own risk.
When I am complete, I will condense it, take the major points, and perhaps write about it here. The other blog is a bit more personal and not as critically minded as this one, so travel there at your own risk.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Awe and Wonder
Have you ever sung those songs that talk about how great and awesome it is that we can see Jesus face to face? Or how about when you praise him whether good things are happening or not? And what about the ones where we lay all our burdens at his feet?
I love those songs. I really do. Its built up a relationship with God that seems healthy. I rely on him for everything, I get to see Jesus face to face someday, he gives me stuff, and relieves my suffering...So much me me me. I thought these songs were good...but I think that to much of a good thing leads to a bad thing...even in praise and worship.
I've found that the words in most of our worship either brings God down to our level or puts us on the same level as him. Yes, I praise you in the storm...see? I'm praising you right now while my world is crashing down on me. That makes me worthy of being with you, right? Ummm...no. And maybe its just me that this music has led me to this point...but I don't think so. I've heard the argument before from people wanting to stick with just hymns and the "good 'ol stuff", so there may be something to this. There's nothing wrong with this music, but there needs to be a balance.
What seems to be missing is a sense of awe and a feeling of "little-ness" in our worship music. As I heard someone argue once, what about what God has done for us? Yeah, all that music has references to it, but it mostly revolves around that's why we praise him. I want to be reminded on occassion that I'm really not that important. If I don't praise God, then the rocks on the ground will. Yes, my praise blesses his heart if it comes from my heart, but he is God and he can find satisfaction in anything else. He doesn't pursue me because he needs me - simply because he wants me. I want to be reminded of that. I want to sing about that. I want to sing about how big and awesome and fearful he can be. I don't want to sing about how my praise is the greatest gift to God. Yeah, its the greatest gift I can give, but its not that big a deal in light of what he's done for me.
I've been cultivating a casual friendship with God, which has its place. But I've sacrificed the awe and respect that God deserves as GOD in trade for a relationship where I feel on equal footing with him.
I love those songs. I really do. Its built up a relationship with God that seems healthy. I rely on him for everything, I get to see Jesus face to face someday, he gives me stuff, and relieves my suffering...So much me me me. I thought these songs were good...but I think that to much of a good thing leads to a bad thing...even in praise and worship.
I've found that the words in most of our worship either brings God down to our level or puts us on the same level as him. Yes, I praise you in the storm...see? I'm praising you right now while my world is crashing down on me. That makes me worthy of being with you, right? Ummm...no. And maybe its just me that this music has led me to this point...but I don't think so. I've heard the argument before from people wanting to stick with just hymns and the "good 'ol stuff", so there may be something to this. There's nothing wrong with this music, but there needs to be a balance.
What seems to be missing is a sense of awe and a feeling of "little-ness" in our worship music. As I heard someone argue once, what about what God has done for us? Yeah, all that music has references to it, but it mostly revolves around that's why we praise him. I want to be reminded on occassion that I'm really not that important. If I don't praise God, then the rocks on the ground will. Yes, my praise blesses his heart if it comes from my heart, but he is God and he can find satisfaction in anything else. He doesn't pursue me because he needs me - simply because he wants me. I want to be reminded of that. I want to sing about that. I want to sing about how big and awesome and fearful he can be. I don't want to sing about how my praise is the greatest gift to God. Yeah, its the greatest gift I can give, but its not that big a deal in light of what he's done for me.
I've been cultivating a casual friendship with God, which has its place. But I've sacrificed the awe and respect that God deserves as GOD in trade for a relationship where I feel on equal footing with him.
Monday, February 25, 2008
What I'm Entitled To
I've been spending the last couple of months in a quagmire of spiritual depression. It's been difficult and hard to handle - I find myself wrestling with God more often than not. Why? Well, its quite simple, really. I'm 24 years old, have a strong desire to be married and raising a family (God-given, I thought), and I'm still single, working in a job that requires me to make it my life.
Something that has been increasingly pressed on me in the last several weeks, though, has been my pride. I didn't think it was pride, at first, but rather a lack of appropriate thankfulness for the things I have been given. I think that stemmed out of a lack of respect and awe for who God REALLY is. So I started trying to thank him for all the things he's given me. That's not always easy to do when your stuck on something you want but it hasn't been given to you yet. It wasn't working - there was something else hidden deeper that was preventing the proper feeling of gratefulness and the good that my God has already done for me...
Last night, I stumbled on it...rather by accident. My pride has led me to a point where I feel that I am ENTITLED to certain things. Where I think I deserve to be given this or that. Well, guess what...I don't. None of us do. We're all the lowest of scum and the only reason we are given any blessings of any sort is because God loves us -
Now, I am convinced that someday I will be married - simply because I don't think God is so cruel to give a desire this strong and not do something with it. Either he'll temper it and replace it with something else, or he'll provide for it. But in no way should I feel entitled to it or deserving of it. It is a gift - that he will give in his time. I need patience. Patience and trust, that he will fufill the desire according to his plan. Trust that his plans are "to give [me] a future and a hope"...and not plans for disaster.
And an appropriate attitude of thankfulness that God would choose to love such a wretch as me.
Something that has been increasingly pressed on me in the last several weeks, though, has been my pride. I didn't think it was pride, at first, but rather a lack of appropriate thankfulness for the things I have been given. I think that stemmed out of a lack of respect and awe for who God REALLY is. So I started trying to thank him for all the things he's given me. That's not always easy to do when your stuck on something you want but it hasn't been given to you yet. It wasn't working - there was something else hidden deeper that was preventing the proper feeling of gratefulness and the good that my God has already done for me...
Last night, I stumbled on it...rather by accident. My pride has led me to a point where I feel that I am ENTITLED to certain things. Where I think I deserve to be given this or that. Well, guess what...I don't. None of us do. We're all the lowest of scum and the only reason we are given any blessings of any sort is because God loves us -
See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
~ Matthew 6:28-34
Now, I am convinced that someday I will be married - simply because I don't think God is so cruel to give a desire this strong and not do something with it. Either he'll temper it and replace it with something else, or he'll provide for it. But in no way should I feel entitled to it or deserving of it. It is a gift - that he will give in his time. I need patience. Patience and trust, that he will fufill the desire according to his plan. Trust that his plans are "to give [me] a future and a hope"...and not plans for disaster.
And an appropriate attitude of thankfulness that God would choose to love such a wretch as me.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
The Carnal Woman
When arguing and fighting about whether women should be submissive to their husbands or not, many women appeal to the fact that God gifted them with many natural leadership abilities.
He also gifted some people with strong sexual drives, as well.
So, in conclusion:
Seriously, God DID give us natural gifts and talents. That's obvious. Its all over scripture. Ephesians 4, 1 Corinthians 13 - 14, Romans 12...I'm certain there are more.
Every single one of those passages, however, requires us to use our gifts within the boundaries of the Holy Spirit. What does that mean? It means, use your holy gifts within the context of scripture.
God gave some of us very strong sexual desires. And he created sex to be a good thing. However, he put boundaries on us that were for our own good AND the well-being of others. "Thou Shalt Not commit adultery." He had good reason for it. Some of us know what those good reasons are because we've indulged in it and have experienced first hand what those consequences are. Some indulge in it and have yet to experience any bad effects. That doesn't make it right, does it?
God gave many women the natural ability to lead. But he placed boundaries on that leadership within the Bible. Exercising those skills with in the context of scripture blesses God, others, and yourself. Exercising them outside of scripture hurts more people than you might know, even if it doesn't hurt yourself.
When claiming that God created you in some way, always remember that you are a fallen creature. You are not without sin. Your natural desires, talents, and skills must be harnessed to God's will, not allowed to reign freely. Yes, he gave you skills, talents, and desires that he wants you to use and have fulfilled. But he wants you to submit those to his will and keep them under his hand.
All this born out of my devotion this morning. I read the New Living Translation Bible and I'm in Genesis 3. It translates Eve's curse as "Your desire will be to control your husband, but he will rule over you."
He also gifted some people with strong sexual drives, as well.
So, in conclusion:
You and me baby ain't nothin' but mammals
So let''s do it like they do on the Discovery Channel
Do it again now
You and me baby ain't nothin' but mammals
So let's do it like they do on the Discovery Channel
Seriously, God DID give us natural gifts and talents. That's obvious. Its all over scripture. Ephesians 4, 1 Corinthians 13 - 14, Romans 12...I'm certain there are more.
Every single one of those passages, however, requires us to use our gifts within the boundaries of the Holy Spirit. What does that mean? It means, use your holy gifts within the context of scripture.
God gave some of us very strong sexual desires. And he created sex to be a good thing. However, he put boundaries on us that were for our own good AND the well-being of others. "Thou Shalt Not commit adultery." He had good reason for it. Some of us know what those good reasons are because we've indulged in it and have experienced first hand what those consequences are. Some indulge in it and have yet to experience any bad effects. That doesn't make it right, does it?
God gave many women the natural ability to lead. But he placed boundaries on that leadership within the Bible. Exercising those skills with in the context of scripture blesses God, others, and yourself. Exercising them outside of scripture hurts more people than you might know, even if it doesn't hurt yourself.
When claiming that God created you in some way, always remember that you are a fallen creature. You are not without sin. Your natural desires, talents, and skills must be harnessed to God's will, not allowed to reign freely. Yes, he gave you skills, talents, and desires that he wants you to use and have fulfilled. But he wants you to submit those to his will and keep them under his hand.
All this born out of my devotion this morning. I read the New Living Translation Bible and I'm in Genesis 3. It translates Eve's curse as "Your desire will be to control your husband, but he will rule over you."
Thursday, January 17, 2008
St. Valentine's Day
Normally, the closer it gets to February, the more pronounced my singleness gets. Luckily, as a single woman who hasn't quite learned to take care of herself properly, I don't frequent shopping stores often enough to catch the Valentine's Day vibe.
However, I have this odd, intense little feeling that it is getting closer. And for once, rather than hate the most detested holiday of the year, I find myself hopeful. Why on earth would I greet such a holiday with Hope when the entire holiday is about Erotic Love? Easy...that's not what its about at all...
I can't find any REAL research on this, so all this is according to Church Lore. Someday I may actually attempt to verify it :)
Around 496 AD, Emperor Claudius was complaining about how his soldiers needed a specific amount of time off to spend with their families. To get rid of that need, he instituted a ban on marriage for all soldiers. A priest in Rome refused to stop marrying and performed wedding ceremonies in secret. This priest was Valentine. He was caught and executed for it.
In a day and age where marriage is treated so flippantly among Christians and non-Christians alike, and articles such as this one are not so uncommon, I think that for once, celebrating St. Valentine's Day will be a good thing.
However, I have this odd, intense little feeling that it is getting closer. And for once, rather than hate the most detested holiday of the year, I find myself hopeful. Why on earth would I greet such a holiday with Hope when the entire holiday is about Erotic Love? Easy...that's not what its about at all...
I can't find any REAL research on this, so all this is according to Church Lore. Someday I may actually attempt to verify it :)
Around 496 AD, Emperor Claudius was complaining about how his soldiers needed a specific amount of time off to spend with their families. To get rid of that need, he instituted a ban on marriage for all soldiers. A priest in Rome refused to stop marrying and performed wedding ceremonies in secret. This priest was Valentine. He was caught and executed for it.
In a day and age where marriage is treated so flippantly among Christians and non-Christians alike, and articles such as this one are not so uncommon, I think that for once, celebrating St. Valentine's Day will be a good thing.
Monday, January 14, 2008
All Those Roads
**This may prove to be a very blasphemous post, it may cause you to think differently, or to think deeper into it. Either way, if you start reading it, I strongly encourage you to finish reading.**
This is a popular quote used primarily to justify one's own beliefs in the face of a God who says there is only one way to him. Jesus states quite clearly, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me." (John 14:6)
But what if all those roads really do eventually lead to God? But each person is stuck somewhere on that path trying to get there. They think they've reached the end, but really they've only found a mirage - an illusion of home. What if all those roads - all those other religions - point directly towards Jesus Christ? And then, through him, you find your way to heaven.
Let me explain. First, some scripture.
By this, we know that God has revealed himself to all people. From our knowledge of scripture, we know that satan is the master deceiver and distorts all truth to lead people astray. I would argue that every world religion has a basic truth found in it, but is heavily distorted and prevents the believer from moving forward. They think they have found the answer and remain in that one place believing it is the end.
Judaism has often been considered a hub of many different religions. Kind of like America, it is very multi-cultural, "borrowing" heavily from world religions that it has come into contact with. From this, Christianity was birthed. It has largely remained consistent since its birth, but the fact is, its roots are in Judaism. Studying world religions will simply verify this fact (it really can not be denied).
There are people who use this fact as a means to prove Christianity as wrong. But what if it simply verifies it? What if all those religions had found a certain truth and their contact with the hebrews was meant as a way for God to reveal something new about him to them? I know this sounds really mystic, but bear with me.
The Egyptians are the first culture that historians have really discovered that believed strongly in life after death. The Hebrews spent several hundred years with these people and still maintained their own monotheistic religion. However, historians think that this is where the concept of life after death originally came from.
Zoroastrianism could possibly become one of my new favorite religions to study because it introduced a concept that no religion had yet come up with. They believed that there would be a world savior. They also believed heavily in an apocalyptic event that would end the world. Zoroastrianism was very popular in the Babylonian and Persian empires. The first apocalyptic writings in the Bible were from Daniel - who was a captive in the Babylonian empire.
These are the two religions that I know of that greatly influenced Judaic thought, but now I want to look at other ancient religious beliefs from cultures no where near the Hebrews. A lot of these coincide with eachother, but I want to focus on the central themes of them.
North American Indians
Truth: Believed strongly in intelligent creation.
Distortion: Creation is too big for one god to do it all, so there must be one main spirit and many demi spirits, each responsible for a different aspect of creation.
South American Natives
Truth: Believed strongly that God required sacrifice to be appeased.
Distortion: The sacrifice could be any human's blood.
Indian Dharmic Religions
Truth: Perfection is necessary to be with God/at peace.
Distortion: Humans can reach perfection. If not in one life, then they are granted multiple lives to continue working towards that perfection.
So, in conclusion, each road contains a truth that points to one supreme God and his son Jesus Christ who was big enough to create the entire universe and loved us enough to give his son as a perfect sacrifice so that none other was required. Through him, all our sins are forgiven and we are covered by his perfect blood so that we may be at peace with God for eternity.
**Note**
I think it is very important to note that this is not a concession that all people go to heaven no matter what they believe. It is saying that each faith or religion does actually have something right...just not completely right. Stopping there and buying into the distortions doesn't give you a spot in heaven just cuz you got it partially right. THE ONLY WAY TO HEAVEN IS THROUGH JESUS CHRIST and that is a truth that I am not trying to debunk. I believe it 100%. I just don't think everyone else is 100% wrong or that Christianity hasn't discovered some truth from them.
All roads lead to heaven
This is a popular quote used primarily to justify one's own beliefs in the face of a God who says there is only one way to him. Jesus states quite clearly, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me." (John 14:6)
But what if all those roads really do eventually lead to God? But each person is stuck somewhere on that path trying to get there. They think they've reached the end, but really they've only found a mirage - an illusion of home. What if all those roads - all those other religions - point directly towards Jesus Christ? And then, through him, you find your way to heaven.
Let me explain. First, some scripture.
But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness. They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.
~Romans 1:18-20
By this, we know that God has revealed himself to all people. From our knowledge of scripture, we know that satan is the master deceiver and distorts all truth to lead people astray. I would argue that every world religion has a basic truth found in it, but is heavily distorted and prevents the believer from moving forward. They think they have found the answer and remain in that one place believing it is the end.
Judaism has often been considered a hub of many different religions. Kind of like America, it is very multi-cultural, "borrowing" heavily from world religions that it has come into contact with. From this, Christianity was birthed. It has largely remained consistent since its birth, but the fact is, its roots are in Judaism. Studying world religions will simply verify this fact (it really can not be denied).
There are people who use this fact as a means to prove Christianity as wrong. But what if it simply verifies it? What if all those religions had found a certain truth and their contact with the hebrews was meant as a way for God to reveal something new about him to them? I know this sounds really mystic, but bear with me.
The Egyptians are the first culture that historians have really discovered that believed strongly in life after death. The Hebrews spent several hundred years with these people and still maintained their own monotheistic religion. However, historians think that this is where the concept of life after death originally came from.
Zoroastrianism could possibly become one of my new favorite religions to study because it introduced a concept that no religion had yet come up with. They believed that there would be a world savior. They also believed heavily in an apocalyptic event that would end the world. Zoroastrianism was very popular in the Babylonian and Persian empires. The first apocalyptic writings in the Bible were from Daniel - who was a captive in the Babylonian empire.
These are the two religions that I know of that greatly influenced Judaic thought, but now I want to look at other ancient religious beliefs from cultures no where near the Hebrews. A lot of these coincide with eachother, but I want to focus on the central themes of them.
North American Indians
Truth: Believed strongly in intelligent creation.
Distortion: Creation is too big for one god to do it all, so there must be one main spirit and many demi spirits, each responsible for a different aspect of creation.
South American Natives
Truth: Believed strongly that God required sacrifice to be appeased.
Distortion: The sacrifice could be any human's blood.
Indian Dharmic Religions
Truth: Perfection is necessary to be with God/at peace.
Distortion: Humans can reach perfection. If not in one life, then they are granted multiple lives to continue working towards that perfection.
So, in conclusion, each road contains a truth that points to one supreme God and his son Jesus Christ who was big enough to create the entire universe and loved us enough to give his son as a perfect sacrifice so that none other was required. Through him, all our sins are forgiven and we are covered by his perfect blood so that we may be at peace with God for eternity.
**Note**
I think it is very important to note that this is not a concession that all people go to heaven no matter what they believe. It is saying that each faith or religion does actually have something right...just not completely right. Stopping there and buying into the distortions doesn't give you a spot in heaven just cuz you got it partially right. THE ONLY WAY TO HEAVEN IS THROUGH JESUS CHRIST and that is a truth that I am not trying to debunk. I believe it 100%. I just don't think everyone else is 100% wrong or that Christianity hasn't discovered some truth from them.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
What the Church can learn from Video Games
...specifically World of Warcraft.
I started playing WoW a couple years ago when I started dating my last boyfriend. I enjoyed it. I was in a long distance relationship, and we used it as a means to interact with eachother. It was more than chatting on AIM or sending "love" letters back and forth through e-mail; it was a way that the two of us could actually play side by side. If he wasn't playing, then rarely was I. My draw to it was my relationship with the person on the other side...
About a year ago I started attending a new church. It was great - at first. I was getting what I needed. I was attending a Bible Study that encouraged us to be reading our bibles every day and to bring questions and/or insights to the bible studies and we would discuss them as a group. It was amazing. Praise and Worship was awesome, the studies were interactive, people were getting to know eachother. And then...it stopped. The pastor leading the study started doing all the talking - still encouraging us to read our bibles every day, but we no longer had the interaction element. As I continued to grow and learn, I recognized a desire to get involved in the ministry of the church, and I told the pastor so. I was approached by the music leader (who happened to like my voice) and asked if I would be interested. I said "YES!!!" It was never followed up on. Six months later, and I'm still there, still a passive member of the church, waiting for these men to follow up on my desire to do more than just listen to them talk. I would show up to places that there was a need, and wait on the sidelines for someone to explain what my role was and what was needed of me, and nothing happened. And lately, my devotion to my bible study has decreased (though I'm working on this ardently), my motivation to attend church has dropped. And where did I go?
World of Warcraft. It was just a little bit at first. Then people in my guild started whispering me that they had missed me in the last couple months. Asked where I had been, and how I was doing. Then the guild in general was demonstrating a need for more raiders. And I wanted to raid with them...so I worked hard to be able to. And then there was a need for Protection Warriors (the characters that take all the damage so no one else does) - I was one. They taught me the fights, they helped me get the gear I needed. Then a bunch of other people wanted to raid too...and now I'm leading a group of them into fights, getting them equipment, and teaching them how to be better players so we waste as little time as possible. I'm tired of it. But I keep going back...why? Here's why:
I am a needed component of a group of people. I am vital to the success of their mission - without me, it can't happen. My company is desired among those my age, as we interact, join new chat channels, and make plans to visit each other (one girl is coming to visit me in January). I am being mentored by the older people in our guild, being taught how to play my part better by some, taught how to better execute the missions by others, and even taught how to be a better leader by even more. AND they are giving me the oppurtunity to lead. Why are they doing this? Why are they investing so much of THEIR time in me? Easy - they saw my desire to interact by my showing up consistently; they saw my desire to be more involved by my being an active learner and participant in discussions; they saw my desire to build relationships by my attempts (though often weak) to socialize.
What did THEY do that my church didn't? Why am I suddenly more dedicated to them than I am to my church? And why can't I find a church that has these skills at building community? A church with these skills of DISCIPLESHIP.
I started playing WoW a couple years ago when I started dating my last boyfriend. I enjoyed it. I was in a long distance relationship, and we used it as a means to interact with eachother. It was more than chatting on AIM or sending "love" letters back and forth through e-mail; it was a way that the two of us could actually play side by side. If he wasn't playing, then rarely was I. My draw to it was my relationship with the person on the other side...
About a year ago I started attending a new church. It was great - at first. I was getting what I needed. I was attending a Bible Study that encouraged us to be reading our bibles every day and to bring questions and/or insights to the bible studies and we would discuss them as a group. It was amazing. Praise and Worship was awesome, the studies were interactive, people were getting to know eachother. And then...it stopped. The pastor leading the study started doing all the talking - still encouraging us to read our bibles every day, but we no longer had the interaction element. As I continued to grow and learn, I recognized a desire to get involved in the ministry of the church, and I told the pastor so. I was approached by the music leader (who happened to like my voice) and asked if I would be interested. I said "YES!!!" It was never followed up on. Six months later, and I'm still there, still a passive member of the church, waiting for these men to follow up on my desire to do more than just listen to them talk. I would show up to places that there was a need, and wait on the sidelines for someone to explain what my role was and what was needed of me, and nothing happened. And lately, my devotion to my bible study has decreased (though I'm working on this ardently), my motivation to attend church has dropped. And where did I go?
World of Warcraft. It was just a little bit at first. Then people in my guild started whispering me that they had missed me in the last couple months. Asked where I had been, and how I was doing. Then the guild in general was demonstrating a need for more raiders. And I wanted to raid with them...so I worked hard to be able to. And then there was a need for Protection Warriors (the characters that take all the damage so no one else does) - I was one. They taught me the fights, they helped me get the gear I needed. Then a bunch of other people wanted to raid too...and now I'm leading a group of them into fights, getting them equipment, and teaching them how to be better players so we waste as little time as possible. I'm tired of it. But I keep going back...why? Here's why:
I am a needed component of a group of people. I am vital to the success of their mission - without me, it can't happen. My company is desired among those my age, as we interact, join new chat channels, and make plans to visit each other (one girl is coming to visit me in January). I am being mentored by the older people in our guild, being taught how to play my part better by some, taught how to better execute the missions by others, and even taught how to be a better leader by even more. AND they are giving me the oppurtunity to lead. Why are they doing this? Why are they investing so much of THEIR time in me? Easy - they saw my desire to interact by my showing up consistently; they saw my desire to be more involved by my being an active learner and participant in discussions; they saw my desire to build relationships by my attempts (though often weak) to socialize.
What did THEY do that my church didn't? Why am I suddenly more dedicated to them than I am to my church? And why can't I find a church that has these skills at building community? A church with these skills of DISCIPLESHIP.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Bold Submission
The story of Ruth in the Bible was always a curious story. I wasn't certain what lessons could be learned there. One of the commenters on my Life Giver post mentioned that she finds it difficult to be noticed now that she's toned down her boldness - attempting to be less intimidating.
Is that the right answer? I don't know. But I think, finally, Ruth may have something to say.
Ruth was a woman from a different country going with her mother-in-law to a new land. The book portrays her as a quiet woman, she never seems to have a whole lot to say. She is no Rebekah or Abigail. She lacks the defiance of Michal and Tamar. She almost comes off as...dare I say it? A wallflower. Nothing is said of her beauty (that I know of) and she is described as a widow. Which she is. She doesn't sound like your typical heroine.
She notices a man who is kind to her. I wonder if Boaz took much note of her other than her being Naomi's shadow. She tells Naomi about him and Naomi claims he would be the best husband for Ruth! He is a kinsman and possibly the closest living relative to Naomi's sons. But first, Boaz must NOTICE Ruth.
Quiet, submissive Ruth. She fades into the backdrop of grain fields and sunny afternoons, lost in the hubbub of a threshing floor. No one seems to notice that she shouldn't be there...yet there she is. And lays at Boaz's feet. Such a bold move. And yet in a completely submissive way. What man wouldn't notice a woman boldly offering herself to him? Not boldly claiming him for herself, but boldly offering herself.
At the completely opposite end of the spectrum is Abigail. She is no wallflower. She is described as beautiful, daring. She is highly respected by the household servants, where her husband is not. She isn't described as disrespectful, but she does come off as very bold. When her husband insults David and he raises his army to come against Nabal, Abigail goes out to protect her household. And the first thing she does when she finds herself faced against David's wrath was to fall on her face in the dirt and cry out "My Lord!"
Abigail was not ashamed of her boldness. She never tempered it in any fashion, and yet she submitted her boldness to her King - never sacrificing it.
And what kind of men did these women end up with? Ruth ended up with a gentle, loving husband. Abigail gained the love and respect of the greatest King of Israel.
I think that if we as women make ourselves less than what we are, we will end up with men that don't have the capacity to let us be more than what we are. Be bold. Be brave. Be intelligent. But be willing to submit that boldness, bravery, and intelligence to a man who is capable of handling it.
Is that the right answer? I don't know. But I think, finally, Ruth may have something to say.
Ruth was a woman from a different country going with her mother-in-law to a new land. The book portrays her as a quiet woman, she never seems to have a whole lot to say. She is no Rebekah or Abigail. She lacks the defiance of Michal and Tamar. She almost comes off as...dare I say it? A wallflower. Nothing is said of her beauty (that I know of) and she is described as a widow. Which she is. She doesn't sound like your typical heroine.
She notices a man who is kind to her. I wonder if Boaz took much note of her other than her being Naomi's shadow. She tells Naomi about him and Naomi claims he would be the best husband for Ruth! He is a kinsman and possibly the closest living relative to Naomi's sons. But first, Boaz must NOTICE Ruth.
Quiet, submissive Ruth. She fades into the backdrop of grain fields and sunny afternoons, lost in the hubbub of a threshing floor. No one seems to notice that she shouldn't be there...yet there she is. And lays at Boaz's feet. Such a bold move. And yet in a completely submissive way. What man wouldn't notice a woman boldly offering herself to him? Not boldly claiming him for herself, but boldly offering herself.
At the completely opposite end of the spectrum is Abigail. She is no wallflower. She is described as beautiful, daring. She is highly respected by the household servants, where her husband is not. She isn't described as disrespectful, but she does come off as very bold. When her husband insults David and he raises his army to come against Nabal, Abigail goes out to protect her household. And the first thing she does when she finds herself faced against David's wrath was to fall on her face in the dirt and cry out "My Lord!"
Abigail was not ashamed of her boldness. She never tempered it in any fashion, and yet she submitted her boldness to her King - never sacrificing it.
And what kind of men did these women end up with? Ruth ended up with a gentle, loving husband. Abigail gained the love and respect of the greatest King of Israel.
I think that if we as women make ourselves less than what we are, we will end up with men that don't have the capacity to let us be more than what we are. Be bold. Be brave. Be intelligent. But be willing to submit that boldness, bravery, and intelligence to a man who is capable of handling it.
Friday, October 12, 2007
I will not weep
I weep.
Alone and cold, I fear.
A walk alone, a long dark shadow
And suddenly life's unclear.
Curled up in my distress,
Held tight by darkened irons,
I feel a stirring.
Oh God, why me?
I weep.
Pain and beauty, tightly woven.
Created with infinite care, placed with you, my love
And now he is undone.
A hope I placed in your heart
Left unheard, you failed to see
you felt a stirring
Oh child, because I love you.
I weep.
Lost and confused, I fear.
A love so hot, hands I trusted
And now I have nowhere to go.
Hidden from my world,
Masked by self-woven veils
I feel a stirring.
Oh God, why me?
I weep.
Death and life, closely knit.
You fell to lustful lies, I blessed with ultimate grace.
And now she feels no more.
A life to give you life.
Misunderstood, you rejected.
You felt a stirring
Oh child, because I forgave you.
I will not weep.
Created in love with tender mercy,
Destroyed in fear and confusion.
Ripped from your warmth, my life sustaining,
You chose to die and watch me die.
I will not stir.
Oh mother, why me?
Alone and cold, I fear.
A walk alone, a long dark shadow
And suddenly life's unclear.
Curled up in my distress,
Held tight by darkened irons,
I feel a stirring.
Oh God, why me?
I weep.
Pain and beauty, tightly woven.
Created with infinite care, placed with you, my love
And now he is undone.
A hope I placed in your heart
Left unheard, you failed to see
you felt a stirring
Oh child, because I love you.
I weep.
Lost and confused, I fear.
A love so hot, hands I trusted
And now I have nowhere to go.
Hidden from my world,
Masked by self-woven veils
I feel a stirring.
Oh God, why me?
I weep.
Death and life, closely knit.
You fell to lustful lies, I blessed with ultimate grace.
And now she feels no more.
A life to give you life.
Misunderstood, you rejected.
You felt a stirring
Oh child, because I forgave you.
I will not weep.
Created in love with tender mercy,
Destroyed in fear and confusion.
Ripped from your warmth, my life sustaining,
You chose to die and watch me die.
I will not stir.
Oh mother, why me?
Monday, October 01, 2007
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Life Giver
The book of Genesis opens up with the story of creation. There are two accounts, one is more straightforward than the other, though I would argue that they do not contradict eachother.
In Genesis 2, when woman is created, she is referred to as a helper, help meet, or something along those lines. Not very complimentary sounding. Some of you might already know, but the hebrew phrase used was Eder Kenegdo. It is only used several other times in the entire Bible, all referring to God. And a more accurate translation (claim the ones who helped translate the word into help meet) is "Life Giver".
The obvious meaning of this is that woman have babies - they give life. But what if there's a more subtle, not so obvious one? One that to understand, you must be willing to accept and understand some truths about the male mind. I have been very blessed lately to have a man willing to discuss these things with me and he's provided some interesting points. I am not going to say they are generic and apply to all men, but throughout history, mankind has done some things and written some things that have been very consistent through out.
So, I'm going to start with looking at guys. I want to start with the King who started the Trojan War. Helen of Troy was considered the "face that launched a thousand ships" (so says Christopher Marlowe). I know there's much debate about whether Helen was really the cause for the war, but I don't care. Its a generally held theory. But could it be that men find life in Rescuing?
The next one, courtesy of my guy friend, was that boys will always act differently when girls are around. Mostly, trying to impress them. He mentioned that a math teacher who understands this will call up a girl to the board first to do a math problem - and hopefully the girl will do the problem right. After that, every boy the teacher calls to the board will do their best to outdo the girl. Not because they think they are supposed to be smarter than the girl, but simply because they want to impress the girl. Could it be that men find life in being Respected and impressing?
Now what about this one - what if men have an incredibly difficult time with rejection? Failure? Not being respected and failing to rescue? What if those fears prevent a man from taking a leading role in...anything? But for a man to truly find life, he must conquer that fear and lead? My father says it. My guy friend says it. My pastor says it. These men want to be leaders, but are afraid of doing so. And fear inhibits true life. So, could it be that women are supposed to be submissive in leadership roles so as to give the man the oppurtunity to do so? And when the man does, wouldn't she have fulfilled one of her purposes in life?
Could it be that being a Life Giver is more than just creating and bearing children? Could it be that being a Life Giver requires being the support rather than the leader? Isn't it possible for a woman to find fulfillment in supporting a strong man? And knowing that he is strong because she gave him the chance to be strong?
In Genesis 2, when woman is created, she is referred to as a helper, help meet, or something along those lines. Not very complimentary sounding. Some of you might already know, but the hebrew phrase used was Eder Kenegdo. It is only used several other times in the entire Bible, all referring to God. And a more accurate translation (claim the ones who helped translate the word into help meet) is "Life Giver".
The obvious meaning of this is that woman have babies - they give life. But what if there's a more subtle, not so obvious one? One that to understand, you must be willing to accept and understand some truths about the male mind. I have been very blessed lately to have a man willing to discuss these things with me and he's provided some interesting points. I am not going to say they are generic and apply to all men, but throughout history, mankind has done some things and written some things that have been very consistent through out.
So, I'm going to start with looking at guys. I want to start with the King who started the Trojan War. Helen of Troy was considered the "face that launched a thousand ships" (so says Christopher Marlowe). I know there's much debate about whether Helen was really the cause for the war, but I don't care. Its a generally held theory. But could it be that men find life in Rescuing?
The next one, courtesy of my guy friend, was that boys will always act differently when girls are around. Mostly, trying to impress them. He mentioned that a math teacher who understands this will call up a girl to the board first to do a math problem - and hopefully the girl will do the problem right. After that, every boy the teacher calls to the board will do their best to outdo the girl. Not because they think they are supposed to be smarter than the girl, but simply because they want to impress the girl. Could it be that men find life in being Respected and impressing?
Now what about this one - what if men have an incredibly difficult time with rejection? Failure? Not being respected and failing to rescue? What if those fears prevent a man from taking a leading role in...anything? But for a man to truly find life, he must conquer that fear and lead? My father says it. My guy friend says it. My pastor says it. These men want to be leaders, but are afraid of doing so. And fear inhibits true life. So, could it be that women are supposed to be submissive in leadership roles so as to give the man the oppurtunity to do so? And when the man does, wouldn't she have fulfilled one of her purposes in life?
Could it be that being a Life Giver is more than just creating and bearing children? Could it be that being a Life Giver requires being the support rather than the leader? Isn't it possible for a woman to find fulfillment in supporting a strong man? And knowing that he is strong because she gave him the chance to be strong?
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Face Value
Over the last couple of years, I've become incredibly passionate about spending time with real, solid, physical people.
Living in a new town with only a couple friends has made my time with those friends very valuable - I enjoy seeing their faces and hearing their voices. Being able to reach out for a hug or touch my cold finger tips to the back of their necks. Laugh at their milk mustaches or the mustard they dropped on their clean, white t-shirts.
I like online community, too. It is a world where how you look doesn't matter - just your personality. People get to know you without the initial reaction to physical appearance. And because people are more cautious online, they tend to reach out in friendship first more often then an immediate dating relationship.
The problem, though, is that online community seems to be dominating the world. I don't want a virtual relationship with my best friend - I want to talk and laugh with him or her and go see a movie. Drive the town looking for a good hangout. Tavel the world and find new things to enjoy.
I remember reading about community socials in local communities - oppurtunities for the people in the area to meet and get to know eachother. Play games and ice breakers. Anything to get to know the people around you.
However, real life has this tendency to put value on physical appearance more than what really matters. I think I would like to value what both have to offer.
Living in a new town with only a couple friends has made my time with those friends very valuable - I enjoy seeing their faces and hearing their voices. Being able to reach out for a hug or touch my cold finger tips to the back of their necks. Laugh at their milk mustaches or the mustard they dropped on their clean, white t-shirts.
I like online community, too. It is a world where how you look doesn't matter - just your personality. People get to know you without the initial reaction to physical appearance. And because people are more cautious online, they tend to reach out in friendship first more often then an immediate dating relationship.
The problem, though, is that online community seems to be dominating the world. I don't want a virtual relationship with my best friend - I want to talk and laugh with him or her and go see a movie. Drive the town looking for a good hangout. Tavel the world and find new things to enjoy.
I remember reading about community socials in local communities - oppurtunities for the people in the area to meet and get to know eachother. Play games and ice breakers. Anything to get to know the people around you.
However, real life has this tendency to put value on physical appearance more than what really matters. I think I would like to value what both have to offer.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
The Value of Virginity
I was reading a blog post on Boundless.org and a couple of the commentors were saying how they are growing discouraged about finding a man who is a virgin and that they desire to marry a virgin. Another commentor pointed out that the men are also feeling discouraged in this. In response to them, I mentioned that their focus shouldn't be so much on whether the other person is a virgin, but whether they are. I was responded to by a young woman telling me that God (through the Bible, I suppose) values virginity and as Christians, we should value it as well - and desire it in our spouses.
This got me to thinking - what IS, exactly, the value of virginity as purported in the Bible? What does scripture lead us to believe about the value of virginity? Has our society raised up virginity to more than it should be, to the point of requiring it in our future spouses? Is this biblical?
I did a look-see and determined that the only place where "marrying virgins" is specifically required is in the Old Testament when commanding the Priests on who they can marry.
The rest of the Bible's expounding on anything related to the subject is on Adultery and is specifically directed towards the reader. Not the reader's spouse or the reader's children.
I think that it is very important to remember that scripture doesn't place the value on Virginity but on the Heart ( Protect the heart above all things, for it is the wellspring of life. ). To put value on virginity is glorifying a physical attribute that will be gone upon your marriage to someone and will be irretrievable (assuming you wait til marriage, as you should). If it were so valuable, it wouldn't last for such a small amount of time. The value, instead, should be what God values the most. It is obvious that God desires our hearts above anything else - not our virginity, not our blood, not our breath, our hair, our money. He wants our hearts - love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and soul. The beauty and the issue of sex is that it binds two people into one - it is as much an emotional act as it is a physical one. Pre-marital sex is warned against so vehemently (and more than any other commandment) because it connects your heart to someone else's who isn't committed to you. We aren't warned against adultery because you should save your virginity for your husband - you are warned against adultery because you should save your heart, not only for your husband, but ultimately for God. Virginity is a SYMBOL of this and nothing more or less. Yes, it is important, but not out of this context.
I wonder if we have over-glorified virginity to the point of expecting it in others. I wonder if this is a wrong attitude. The person who you are going to marry is already aware of what the Bible says on adultery, and if he is not a virgin and is honest with you about it, Virginity should not be a pre-requisite to marriage.
The Bible warns against it for our own safety, good, and to preserve the relationship we have with the Father. Through our purity (not only in sex, but in other things as well), we are to glorify God. To lose sight of this goal in our own lives means to miss something very important in life. We should not be aiming to expect everyone out there to be perfect, but instead lovingly encourage them to pursue God with all their heart, mind, and soul - and sexual purity should be a by-product of that and nothing more.
This got me to thinking - what IS, exactly, the value of virginity as purported in the Bible? What does scripture lead us to believe about the value of virginity? Has our society raised up virginity to more than it should be, to the point of requiring it in our future spouses? Is this biblical?
I did a look-see and determined that the only place where "marrying virgins" is specifically required is in the Old Testament when commanding the Priests on who they can marry.
The rest of the Bible's expounding on anything related to the subject is on Adultery and is specifically directed towards the reader. Not the reader's spouse or the reader's children.
I think that it is very important to remember that scripture doesn't place the value on Virginity but on the Heart ( Protect the heart above all things, for it is the wellspring of life. ). To put value on virginity is glorifying a physical attribute that will be gone upon your marriage to someone and will be irretrievable (assuming you wait til marriage, as you should). If it were so valuable, it wouldn't last for such a small amount of time. The value, instead, should be what God values the most. It is obvious that God desires our hearts above anything else - not our virginity, not our blood, not our breath, our hair, our money. He wants our hearts - love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and soul. The beauty and the issue of sex is that it binds two people into one - it is as much an emotional act as it is a physical one. Pre-marital sex is warned against so vehemently (and more than any other commandment) because it connects your heart to someone else's who isn't committed to you. We aren't warned against adultery because you should save your virginity for your husband - you are warned against adultery because you should save your heart, not only for your husband, but ultimately for God. Virginity is a SYMBOL of this and nothing more or less. Yes, it is important, but not out of this context.
I wonder if we have over-glorified virginity to the point of expecting it in others. I wonder if this is a wrong attitude. The person who you are going to marry is already aware of what the Bible says on adultery, and if he is not a virgin and is honest with you about it, Virginity should not be a pre-requisite to marriage.
The Bible warns against it for our own safety, good, and to preserve the relationship we have with the Father. Through our purity (not only in sex, but in other things as well), we are to glorify God. To lose sight of this goal in our own lives means to miss something very important in life. We should not be aiming to expect everyone out there to be perfect, but instead lovingly encourage them to pursue God with all their heart, mind, and soul - and sexual purity should be a by-product of that and nothing more.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Woman, Be Silent
Women should learn quietly and submissively. I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly. For God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result. But women will be saved through childbearing assuming they continue to live in faith, love, holiness, and modesty.
- 1 Timothy 2:11-15
I think that this has got to be one of the most difficult passages in the Bible for any woman to digest. I finally have some insight on it, though! Before I go on, yes the author of the "insight" is a man. But I'd like to quote something he said before I begin.
This passage is not about male or female superiority. Any honest male knows thatthe grading curve was always messed up by the girls in his class. What man has not been out-thought, out-talked, and out-done by his female counterparts? Your experiences need be no larger than your family to know women who are superior to their fathers, brothers, and husbands.
-R. Kent Hughes
So, to begin, I know many people who like to say that Paul is just flat out wrong here. There is no way that Paul is preaching the word of God right here, no way that what he is saying is not oppressive of women, no way he is not being sexist. And we know God can't possibly be sexist, so Paul is in human error in this passage.
As Mr. Hughes pointed out in the article I read, Paul doesn't claim this on his authority. He uses the authority of God's creation to back up his argument. God created Adam first, then Eve. Adam is the head, not Eve. Then, the touchiest subject of all, it was woman who was deceived and then in turn deceived man.
Ok, so what am I getting at here? Paul thinks we should stay quiet because we are responsible for original sin? No. Paul doesn't want us to teach men or to have authority over them because it is not in the natural order that God revealed through creation. The sin of Adam and Eve was the original debunking of the natural order and the result was death. So, it would seem to me that Paul wants us to avoid death by observing the proper order of creation.
I got started on all this because this morning in my Bible study I came across a woman named Phoebe who was a deacon in a church (Romans 15 or 16, vs 1-2). I was confused, because Paul spoke very highly of her and told the church to help her in her duties. And yet, Paul is the one who said this as well. Why is he being contradictory? After further study, I discovered (largely in part due to Mr. Hughes, though other research played a role) that the "to teach men" was the same word usually used for disciples and meant preaching. Paul did not want women to be in a position where they could create doctrine or enforce doctrine. That role, as I'm sure many would agree, is one of incredible authority and leadership. Those roles are assigned, as Paul points out, in creation.
Now this whole theory on the original sin being the first debunking of the natural order of creation. God created Adam. God created Eve from Adam. God gave Adam and Eve authority over all the creatures. So, the order is God, Man, Woman, Creature. Sin entered the world like this: Creature teaches Woman that she can be like God if she eats the fruit. Woman listens to Creature, eats the fruit, and then instructs Man to eat. Man obeys Woman. Order introduced in original sin - Creature, Woman, Man...where's God?
So, Paul goes on to say, women can be saved through childbearing. Wait...what? I have to have a baby to have eternal life? Some interpret that to mean that they will be saved through the birth of Christ. Mr. Hughes points out that this is a little too abstract for Paul, and mentions that childbearing is the one indisputable thing that distinguishes women from men. Hughes claims that this verse says that women will be saved by recognizing their place in the order of creation. And he's right. Our place in creation is under God and under the authority of the Son of Man. It is only in recognizing that that we can be saved. Its kind of like honoring your father and mother. If you can't honor and respect the physical authority placed above you, how are you going to honor and respect an invisible God? If women can't submit and listen quietly to the doctrine and theology set before them, what makes us think they can submit and listen quietly to God's authority?
To conclude this controversial blog, I'd like to say that women are not without authority in the church. They are simply without authority in doctrine and theology. They are allowed to teach, but must submit to the heads of the church for doctrine. And the heads of the church must submit to the authority of God's Word for their doctrine.
I still don't think women should be preaching.
(The article is here: Living Out God's Order)
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Did you say "SEX"?
First, before you continue to read this spiel, I would like to refer you to an article, A Peculiar People: Sex and the Young Christian.
Now, some quotes:
But oh, there's so much more. Apparently, there's a trend towards fewer marriages, fewer young adults in the church, and an increase in the preaching on the "Gift of Singleness". And young men seem to be gobbling it up. And young women, to some extent, are too. But the first article brings up a very valid point. In our "Gift of Singleness", how many of us are really pursuing what Paul was referring to in 1 Corinthians 7? According to the article, we are not remaining chaste, we are not remaining sexually pure, and instead, we are falling into the same trap as our secular counterparts.
I'm very surprised that the article did not quote or even mention 1 Corinthians 7, so I'm going to quote some of it here:
I know beyond all doubt that young men can not wait until they are 30 or 40 before having sex. I'm a 23 year-old woman and, in spite of all the claims that women aren't as sexual as men, I'm VERY sexually frustrated and in need and want of sex. I'm "burning with passion", but not just any passion; it is a desire to give myself completely to a husband and to satisfy his needs as well.
What is so ironic about this "burning with passion" bit, is that if you do suffer from a physical need and want for sex (or a relationship), you are going to be even more distracted from God and his calling for you then if you were married and finding that satisfaction. But the distraction won't be one that God created to be good and holy, it will be a distraction characterized by a constant battle against temptation and sin.
So, I must therefore follow Paul's command and "get married". But where are the men? They are embracing this so-called gift and, as one young man put it, indulging in a self-centered, irresponsible life-style. But I am going to add that it is an excuse to be cowardly and fearful and not take a position of leadership. Of course, the men aren't the only ones, as some young men that desire marriage have certainly discovered. There are women who embrace this life-style as well.
Now, I'm not saying that the gift of Celibacy is not a legitimate gift. I honestly think it is. However, it is not one to be taken lightly, it is one to be prayed about. Celibacy is not an excuse to live a self-centered life. It is not an excuse to remain unmarried and sexually promiscuous. It is not SINGLENESS. Singleness is the state in which you are free to pursue a committed relationship with another individual while pursuing a relationship with God. Celibacy is the state in which you pursue God and God only, leaving behind sex and a hope for a permanent, earthly relationship. I also believe that celibacy is not as common a gift as it has suddenly appeared to be.
Now, some quotes:
Two decades of coupling, uncoupling, hooking up, relationships and shopping around. [The teenage and young adult years aren't] a transition anymore. [They're] a sprawling life stage, and nobody knows the rules.
~ David Brooks, New York Times
Contemporary Christian teaching on this subject blurs the line between celibacy and singleness and leaves singles mistakenly believing that the two are the same. God is often painted as capriciously willing singleness for some and not others. Consequently and sadly, many Christian singles resign themselves to this less-than-ideal state. A more thoughtful and critical examination reveals that today's singleness is not some sort of divinely ordained, interminable state for a quarter of the population, but the result of a string of systematic impediments to marriageSome of these impediments are a dating structure not geared towards marriage, but low-commitment relationships, a lack of male leadership, and (my favorite) a "redefinition or a defining downward of healthy biblical adulthood."
~Debbie Maken, Rethinking the Gift of Singleness
But oh, there's so much more. Apparently, there's a trend towards fewer marriages, fewer young adults in the church, and an increase in the preaching on the "Gift of Singleness". And young men seem to be gobbling it up. And young women, to some extent, are too. But the first article brings up a very valid point. In our "Gift of Singleness", how many of us are really pursuing what Paul was referring to in 1 Corinthians 7? According to the article, we are not remaining chaste, we are not remaining sexually pure, and instead, we are falling into the same trap as our secular counterparts.
I'm very surprised that the article did not quote or even mention 1 Corinthians 7, so I'm going to quote some of it here:
1Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry.[a] 2But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.And two verses later, Paul adds this often forgotten verse:
~ 1 Corinthians 7:1 - 7
But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.Oh...wait, what was that? Paul doesn't say to stay unmarried if you find yourself "burning with passion". He tells us that we SHOULD get married. How many churches are actually teaching this little bit with their "Gift of Singleness" doctrine? Paul makes it quite clear that not all men are able to proceed with life-long singleness. He says it is better, yes. So that you can pursue God with all your heart, mind, and soul without being concerned about a wife. But if you can not control yourself, or if you have a desire to get married some day, than pursue it.
~1 Corinthians 7:9
I know beyond all doubt that young men can not wait until they are 30 or 40 before having sex. I'm a 23 year-old woman and, in spite of all the claims that women aren't as sexual as men, I'm VERY sexually frustrated and in need and want of sex. I'm "burning with passion", but not just any passion; it is a desire to give myself completely to a husband and to satisfy his needs as well.
What is so ironic about this "burning with passion" bit, is that if you do suffer from a physical need and want for sex (or a relationship), you are going to be even more distracted from God and his calling for you then if you were married and finding that satisfaction. But the distraction won't be one that God created to be good and holy, it will be a distraction characterized by a constant battle against temptation and sin.
So, I must therefore follow Paul's command and "get married". But where are the men? They are embracing this so-called gift and, as one young man put it, indulging in a self-centered, irresponsible life-style. But I am going to add that it is an excuse to be cowardly and fearful and not take a position of leadership. Of course, the men aren't the only ones, as some young men that desire marriage have certainly discovered. There are women who embrace this life-style as well.
Now, I'm not saying that the gift of Celibacy is not a legitimate gift. I honestly think it is. However, it is not one to be taken lightly, it is one to be prayed about. Celibacy is not an excuse to live a self-centered life. It is not an excuse to remain unmarried and sexually promiscuous. It is not SINGLENESS. Singleness is the state in which you are free to pursue a committed relationship with another individual while pursuing a relationship with God. Celibacy is the state in which you pursue God and God only, leaving behind sex and a hope for a permanent, earthly relationship. I also believe that celibacy is not as common a gift as it has suddenly appeared to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)