Join My Community!
Author Archives: Craig L. Adams
The Waiting Time
Psalm 25
Reflections and a Prayer
“To you, O Lord, I lift up my soul. O my God, in you I trust; do not let me be put to shame; do not let my enemies exult over me. Do not let those who wait for you be put to shame; let them be ashamed who are wantonly treacherous.” (Psalms 25:1-3 NRSV)
Several years ago, I began thinking of Psalm 25 as a Psalm for the waiting time. There are lots of Psalms — and other passages of Scripture — like this, but I hadn’t always seen Psalm 25 this way. Many times in the Hebrew scriptures we are exhorted to “wait on the LORD” — and we are told the advantages of such an approach to life. “Wait for the Lord; be strong, and let your heart take courage; wait for the Lord!” (Psalms 27:14 NRSV) “For the wicked shall be cut off, but those who wait for the Lord shall inherit the land.” (Psalms 37:9 NRSV) “I wait for the Lord, my soul waits, and in his word I hope….” (Psalms 130:5 NRSV).
Now check out Psalm 25:1-2 again — in whatever translation you have at hand.
In his commentary on the Psalms (1983: Word Biblical Commentary), Peter C. Craigie translates these opening two verses this way:
“Of David.
For you I have waited, O Lord.
I will lift up my soul to my God.
In you I have trusted — let me not be put to shame;
Let not my enemies exult over me.”
This translation assumes a conjectural reading in which the translator has supplied a form of the verb qāwāh, (to hope in; to hope for, wait for, look for) which also appears in verse 3 and verse 21. The verb is supplied to give better sense to the sentence as it stands. (See Craigie’s commentary, page 216 for more details.)
The benefit of this translation for me was that — when I first encountered it many years ago — it brought out the emphasis on waiting and hoping. I might otherwise have missed it. The Psalmist alternates between this theme of waiting, and his repeated expressions of confidence in God.
And, the point is important one for us. We spend quite a bit of our lives in the waiting times. There are those times between our prayers, our petitions and their answers. There are hopes and dreams within us that remain unfulfilled. And, we wait for answers, re-affirming our confidence in God.
Yes, Psalm 25 is an expression of trust. But, it is raised in the context of unfulfilled hopes and dreams. It can be frustrating to live in the waiting time. Maybe this is why the themes of Advent are so much less popular than the themes associated with Christmas. Advent reminds us we are awaiting something — there is a promise that remains unfulfilled.
But, it seems that the Old Testament writers were able to live in this tension. They remembered prophecies which remained unfulfilled, they held onto Psalms that described a king better than any they ever really knew. It is remarkable to me what difficult and even painful memories the Israelites held onto as the record of their faith journey. They were a people with a clear sense of their own historical failures. They were a people who knew they were awaiting something greater: a greater day than they had ever known, a greater king than they had ever known. They held onto that sense of being a people who were awaiting more.
Today Christians can barely do it for 4 weeks for Advent. We want the waiting to give way to realization. We want everything in the here and now. Not later. Now.
To wait on the Lord is to keep hanging on. We hang on to hope in the midst of contradiction. Yes, it is frustrating to be living in the waiting time. but, these can also be some of the most spiritually significant times of our lives. The frustrating of waiting is often a creative frustration. We don’t give up on our expectations or hopes or dreams or prayers. We look in expectation toward God. “In You I have trusted….”
There is great theological significance to the waiting times of our lives: our faith tells us that all of life is a waiting time. The vision of God’s Reign of peace and salvation and justice and wholeness is larger and greater than anything that we experience in this life. When we pray those words: “thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven” we are asking and longing for a world better than the one we have lived in up to now. We acknowledge our frustration with the way the world is — and place our hope in God — for what yet can be.
For the Christian, all of life is a waiting time. We live in a between-time. We are not satisfied with the world the way it is. The promises of God point us to the future. Our desire is to see more and more of God’s Will done on earth — and in us! So, we pray for our world, our country, our community, our church: “Lord, your will be done. We don’t see that right now. But, we desire to see it more and more.” We still believe in the worth of people. We still believe in peace. We still believe in justice. The promises of God always point us to the horizon. The God who has been faithful in the past — the God who revealed Himself in Jesus Christ — is the One who promises to bring us into an ever-better future.
“For you I have waited, O Lord.
I will lift up my soul to my God.”
O Lord,
God of the Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
God of the prophets
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
In the midst of my waiting
In the midst of my frustrations with the world the way it is
In the midst of my disappointments with myself,
I will lift up my soul to You, my God.
You alone are my hope and stay.
Grant to me a spirit of trust.
May I find peace and direction in you. Amen.
[Cross-posted here: Commonplace Holiness.]
What God Do You Worship?
Psalm 135:5
REFLECTIONS AND A PRAYER
As with so many of the Psalms, these words are a call to worship.
“For I know that the Lord is great; our Lord is above all gods.”
In this verse both the personal name of God (Yahweh) and the term “Lord” (adon) appear. In the original language the words lie side by side: as if to emphasize that it is Yahweh and none other who is Lord above all other powers.
As I understand it. the word “worship” comes from the old English term worth-ship. Worship recognizes the worthiness and power of the God we know through Jesus Christ.
Worship acknowledges that I am not at the center of the universe, God is. Worship works against narcissistic self-absorption. It says I have a Creator. It says there is One who is greater than I am. It calls me into relationship with the One who is greater than I am. It calls me into the Presence of the One who is greater than all people — and all the powers of this world.
Worship is a kind of therapy. It calls me away from my excessive pre-occupation with myself. It calls me to a life of love: devotion to God and devotion to the best interests of other people. It is natural for us to be pre-occupied with ourselves. We look out into the world from our own set of eyes. It must seem at first as if all the world is a show being put on just for us. But, worship reminds me that this is not so. There is a God from whom I have come — unto whom I return. And there are other people — created in the image of God — all around me. There are as much worthy of respect and consideration as I am. Worship calls me to love God and love others.
Whatever our idea of God may be — God is always greater. Whatever our experience of God’s grace and presence may be — God is always greater. Everything has come from God. And, God is greater than the limited human mind can comprehend.
The Psalms were written at a time when it was presumed that everyone believed in God — or, rather a god of some sort. People served different gods. Sure. But, it was not common to suppose that there was no Higher Power of any sort. Yes, it says in Psalms 14:1 and Psalms 53:1 that fools say in their heart “there is no god.” But, I think this is intended in a moral sense: The foolish person says that there is no God to whom we must answer of our actions. Maybe it seems like a fine point: but the issue in these verses is moral, not strictly philosophical. Modern philosophical atheists are not necessarily “fools” in this sense. Many of them are quite moral. They don’t believe in God on philosophical grounds.
In the days of the Psalms you could assume that a person believed in a god of some sort. The question was: what god do you serve? Is it a cruel god? Is it a nationalistic god? Is it a god who is unconcerned with human well being and flourishing? Is it a god of vengeance? Is it a capricious god who chooses to send some to an eternal Hell and some to an eternal Heaven out of his own secret and eternal whim? Or is it a God who embodies love, mercy, faithfulness, compassion and justice?
Followers of a monstrous god are likely to become monsters themselves. The god you serve will be reflected in your life. Thomas Paine once said: “Belief in a cruel God makes a cruel man.”
The Israelites knew a God who was a “compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness…” (Exodus 34:6). The hard thing for them — and for us! — is to comprehend a God of grace. Slowly, through time, they came to understand better and better.
And, they knew that their God — the God who had called Abraham, Isaac and Jacob — was above all other gods. The God of love and faithfulness and redemption and justice is the only One worthy of praise and service. Notice the wording. It is like this: “I know that great is Yahweh, the Lord (adon) over all gods (elohim).”
It would seem, in an age of skepticism, that all believers in God are somehow bound together. Not so. Not really. The question is the same now as ever: what god do you serve?
Yes. There are atheists. Yes, they are quite vocal in our time. But, many of them are atheists today because they were raised in an oppressive religious environments. They have shaken off the oppressive god they were taught — in order to embrace freedom and learning and compassion. For many, it feels better to have no God than to have the god under whom they were raised.
But, I can’t help but feel: serving a negation is not ultimately satisfying, either. We are born to ask questions, to try to put together something of the Big Picture of life and meaning and morality. We are here for a purpose. Even science itself seems to tell us that. So, what does it all mean? And, the Bible answers to this longing for meaning with a story: the story of a loving God who send His Son to redeem us and bring to our brief and transitory lives an eternal hope!
Last week I posted a link on Twitter to an article by Roger Olsen entitled: “Calvinism leads to universalism…”. A Calvinist Twitter gadfly was offended. He replied essentially that: No! Calvinism doesn’t lead to universalism! Calvinists teach reprobation! I’m sure he didn’t understand when I replied to him that the Calvinistic doctrine of reprobation is (from my point of view) far worse! It undermines the notion that God’s love is for everyone. (See: Calvin on John 3:16). This was one of John Wesley’s primary objections to Calvinism. It makes God seem monstrous, rather than loving and merciful.
For many God is harsh and demanding — a taskmaster that is never satisfied. And, as a result, they carry around a unresolved burden of guilt. They can never be good enough. They can never do enough.
I don’t want to think like that. I don’t want to be like that.
Am I serving the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ today? Am I serving a God of justice, mercy and love? Am I seeking to balance those virtues in my life? For if the God of Jesus Christ is truly “Lord is above all gods” then the power of the Holy Spirit is the greatest power in this world — the power of God’s love is greater than any earthly power.
A PRAYER:
Lord God,
God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
a God merciful and gracious,
slow to anger,
and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness:
I worship You today.
May there be no false God in my affections.
May there be no false God in my life.
Teach me the way of mercy.
Teach me the way of loyalty and faithfulness.
Teach me to forgive.
Restrain my anger — even when it is just.
Teach me patience.
Grant that my life — today — will reflect the good and merciful God I choose to serve,
Through Jesus Christ, the Lord. Amen.
[Cross posted here: Commonplace Holiness.]
Calvin on John 3:16
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.” — John 3:16 (NRSV).
JOHN CALVIN COMMENTS:
“’That whosoever believeth on him may not perish.’ It is a remarkable commendation of faith, that it frees us from everlasting destruction. For he intended expressly to state that, though we appear to have been born to death, undoubted deliverance is offered to us by the faith of Christ; and, therefore, that we ought not to fear death, which otherwise hangs over us. And he has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is also the import of the term world, which he formerly used; for though nothing will be found in the world that is worthy of the favor of God, yet he shows himself to be reconciled to the whole world, when he invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life.”
Um Okay. I think I’m with you there, brother John.
JOHN CALVIN COMMENTS:
“Let us remember, on the other hand, that while life is promised universally to all who believe in Christ, still faith is not common to all. For Christ is made known and held out to the view of all, but the elect alone are they whose eyes God opens, that they may seek him by faith. Here, too, is displayed a wonderful effect of faith; for by it we receive Christ such as he is given to us by the Father — that is, as having freed us from the condemnation of eternal death, and made us heirs of eternal life, because, by the sacrifice of his death, he has atoned for our sins, that nothing may prevent God from acknowledging us as his sons. Since, therefore, faith embraces Christ, with the efficacy of his death and the fruit of his resurrection, we need not wonder if by it we obtain likewise the life of Christ.”
MY RESPONSE:
Whoa! What do you mean “on the other hand”? Umm… Now you seem to be dodging out of it all by appealing to a theology that is rooted in something else, brother John.
Here you are clearly leaving exegesis behind and trying to reconcile the verse with a preconceived theology. How can ‘life’ be promised to those incapable of receiving it? It can’t. How can God ‘invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers’ (as you say) if God is choosing to withhold the ability to believe from some?
You can’t have it both ways. I mean, I know you’re a logical guy, John. Isn’t it possible that Augustine was wrong in the Enchiridion — where this same logical inconsistency can be found?
JOHN CALVIN COMMENTS:
“Still it is not yet very evident why and how faith bestows life upon us. Is it because Christ renews us by his Spirit, that the righteousness of God may live and be vigorous in us; or is it because, having been cleansed by his blood, we are accounted righteous before God by a free pardon? It is indeed certain, that these two things are always joined together; but as the certainty of salvation is the subject now in hand, we ought chiefly to hold by this reason, that we live, because God loves us freely by not imputing to us our sins. For this reason sacrifice is expressly mentioned, by which, together with sins, the curse and death are destroyed. I have already explained the object of these two clauses, which is, to inform us that in Christ we regain the possession of life, of which we are destitute in ourselves; for in this wretched condition of mankind, redemption, in the order of time, goes before salvation.”
What! Now you seem to be having problems with your earlier statement that [faith] ‘frees us from everlasting destruction.’ Do you mean that ‘faith bestows life upon us’ (as you said earlier) or ‘life’ (through grace) bestows faith upon us?
Now you are saying that redemption precedes salvation, because the ability to believe is itself the result of that salvation. If the ability to believe is wholly the decision of God, then it is God who has determined the issues of life and death. It is your theology that has dictated that “redemption, in the order of time, goes before salvation” not the text itself.
I agree that part of the message of this verse is ‘that in Christ we regain the possession of life, of which we are destitute in ourselves’ but it is also a universal offer of eternal life (thus, it says: “whoever”) — a possibility your theology does not seem to allow for! In my opinion, making sense of this verse requires a concept of Prevenient Grace, which allows fallen humans to respond with faith to the offer of life.
Otherwise, from your point of view, the verse should read either:
“For God so loved the elect that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who belongs to the elect and, thus, has faith, may therefore believe in him unto eternal life.”
or, more simply:
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has eternal life may believe in him.”
But, surely you see, don’t you, it doesn’t say either of those things. You’ve turned it around backwards. This is no longer the Scripture with which you began.
JOHN CALVIN COMMENTS:
(Start gathering the wood again, boys, I think there’s another heretic in town.)
[Cross posted from here: Commonplace Holiness.]
Binney & Steele on Women Preachers
I see that Derek’s latest post is on NT Wright’s remarks on women’s roles in the Church. And, I thought a little reminder of the historic Wesleyan / Holiness position on this issue might be of interest to some people.
I know it’s a paradigm shift for a lot of people, but early Methodists and the leaders of the 19th Century revival movement, while strongly committed to the Scriptures as the infallible Word of God, were not only abolitionists (in the days when slavery was a live issue) but also encouraged the idea of women in ministry — and this, long, long before the contemporary feminist movement. To demonstrate this, I offer the following abstract from Binney’s Theological Compend written by Amos Binney and Daniel Steele and published in 1839. This text is in the public domain. Anyone who doubts that Binney was an inerrantist may check out his views on Scripture here: Divine Revelation.
WOMAN’S SPHERE IN THE CHURCH.
This is not limited to the duties of the family or household, since she is often by nature and grace pre-eminently adapted for a wider service. Hence women were employed as prophets, that is, in the sense of public religious teachers, including the higher ministerial duties, as appears from the rank next after apostles . 1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11. Compare Acts 2:17-18; 21:9; Rom 16:1-2. So in the Old Testament. Exodus 15:20; Judges 4:4; 2 Kings 22:14; Num 11:29.
Compare also Psalm 68:11, where the true rendering is, of the women preachers there was a great host; which accords with the wish of Moses, Numbers 11:29, and of Paul, I Cor 14:5. (181. Who should govern in the decisions of the Church? What is the duty of the minority? What benefit will result? What is said of woman’s sphere? Of their service as prophets or teachers? Did Paul condemn the practice?)
Some have understood Paul as prohibiting women teaching. I Cor 14:34-35; 1 Tim 2: 11-12. But he evidently refers to such only as prayed and prophesied unvailed, as appears 1 Cor 11:5-13. Paul in this had respect simply to the usage of society, as was his custom in matters of indifference. I Cor 9:19-23. To say that his prohibition applies alike to all times and conditions of society, is to say that the prudential regulations of a degraded heathen people, eighteen hundred years ago, are universally binding, and that Christianity in this respect has wrought no change in the world it came to reform. Paul surely had a different estimate of woman service. Rom 16:1-7, 12-15. His first public discourse in Europe was at a meeting of women, and his first convert and host was a woman. Acts 16:9-15.
There is indisputable scriptural and historical proof that subordinate official position was accorded to women in the apostolic Church:- 1. The correct translation of Rom 16:1-2, shows that Phebe was a deacon of the Church and a patron of many-the original of patron being radically the same as is rendered, he that ruleth, in chap. 12:8. (182. What is said of his estimate of women? Was official position accorded to her? What is said of Phebe? What exposition of Rom. 16:1-2?) of Deacons not only minister to the sick and needy, but from Phil. 1:1, and I Tim. 3:2, 8, we infer that they preached and discharged other spiritual functions subordinate to the elders or bishops, who correspond to the pastors of modern times.
2. The rules of conduct laid down for women in I Tim 3:11, and Titus 2:3, have been referred to the deaconesses by a series of eminent commentators from Chrysostom to Alford.
3. Dr. Schaff and other scholars interpret the words, “let not a widow be taken into the number,” I Tim 5:9. Let not a widow be elected and ordained under threescore years old.
4. From Titus 2:3-4, we learn that women were employed as teachers in the direct personal application of Christian truth.
5. Pliny, a few years later, speaks of the order of deaconesses as exercising, in relation to their own sex, functions analogous to those of the deacons.
The history of the early Christian Church confirms this statement, and adds, also, that women baptized. (183. What exposition of I Tim 3:11; 5:9? Of Titus 2:3? What is said of the history of the early Church?) Signal honors are recorded of woman’s devotion to Christ and his cause. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 10:38-42. She was first to preach the actual advent of the promised Messiah, both to the Jews and to the Samaritans. Luke 2:36-38; John 4:28, etc.; and first to preach the risen Savior to his doubting apostles. Matt 28:7-9, 17.
“Not she, with traitorous kiss, her Savior stung; — Luke 22:47-48.
Not she denied him with unholy tongue; — Matt 26:69-75.
She, while apostles shrank, could danger brave: —Matt 26:56
Last at the cross, and earliest at his grave.” — Matt 27:55-56 28:1.
— Amos Binney & Daniel Steele, Binney’s Theological Compend (1839).
So, it seems to me that people within the Wesleyan movement have listened to scripture in a different way than those in other traditions. It was not a difference in their explicit doctrine of Scripture, but in the ways in which Scripture spoke to them. (And, that is to say: it’s hermeneutics, not exegesis per se.)
[Cross posted at: Commonplace Holiness.]
A Hunger for Worship
Reflection and a prayer, based on: Psalm 135:1-4
I started reading and meditating on Psalm 135 on a stormy morning. Thus, it became memorable for me. I slowly read these lines:
- “He it is who makes the clouds rise at the end of the earth; he makes lightnings for the rain and brings out the wind from his storehouses.” (v.7 NRSV)
while a thunderstorm was raging outside. So, for the last few days, I’ve been returning to this Psalm.
Here’s how it starts.
The Psalm opens with a Hallelujah — quite literally!
Our translations say: “Praise the LORD.” This is correct. “Hallelujah” means “praise the God of Israel.” The name “Jah,” “Yah” or “Yahweh” is the name by which Israel’s God was known. And, it carries with it all the rich history of the nation. This is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. This is the God of Moses.
- “God also said to Moses, ‘Thus you shall say to the Israelites, ‘The Lord, the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you’: This is my name forever, and this my title for all generations.’” (Exodus 3:15 NRSV).
And for the Christian: this is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The very phrase “Hallelujah” resonates with the rich and complex history recorded in the Bible. We are called to praise this particular God. Not: God as a philosophical idea. Not: God as an abstraction. Not: “your Higher Power, however you may understand that.” But: God as known to us through the story of Israel, the story of Jesus, the story of the church’s proclamation & witness. You know: that God!
So, to me, the words that follow simply echo the thoughts that are implied in the opening Hallelujah:
“Praise the name of the Lord…”
I think the use of term shem (translated “name”) by the Israelites is a reflection of their caution in speaking about God. Even the Israelites knew that the Creator of all things was a being beyond their understanding. This isn’t some sort of contemporary insight. To some degree, it is as old as the realization of God’s existence. It is as old as the realization of God’s greatness. The created can never fully understand their Creator. We cannot fully describe God. We cannot enclose God in the parameters of human thought. God is greater. God is greater than our greatest idea or thought. As human beings we barely know how to speak about God. Language fails us.
But, here’s the thing: God has made God’s own self known! God revealed Himself to Abraham, to Isaac, to Jacob, to Moses, to David, to the prophets. God has made Himself known in Jesus Christ. And, God made Himself known in the preaching of the apostles and their successors.
God is revealed here and now — to the human heart and mind — in the preaching and teaching of the Gospel of Christ.
So, to say “Praise the “name of the Lord” is to say “praise God as we know God.” Or: “Praise God as God has revealed Himself to us.” Notice how often in the OT this word shem is used this way.
- Psalms 8:9: “O Lord, our Sovereign, how majestic is your name in all the earth!”
- Psalms 9:2: “I will be glad and exult in you; I will sing praise to your name, O Most High.”
- Psalms 33:21: “Our heart is glad in him, because we trust in his holy name.“
And, so forth. Rather than: “God dwells in Zion” it is: God’s name dwells in Zion: God as He has made Himself known.
Never think you have come to fully understand God. Never think the last word has been spoken — either by you or by anyone. God is always greater. God is greater than whatever the human mind can conceive.
“praise him, you servants of the Lord,”
It seems to me that there is a progression in this psalm: first it is the priests and Levites who are called upon to praise God, then it is all Israel.
I understand “servants” here to mean priests and Levites. I base this on the very next phrase:
“you that stand in the house of the Lord, in the courts of the house of our God.”
These are the people who officially lead in worship. They need to give the example, so that all of Israel — and really, all the world — can be invited to join in that praise. If the leaders don’t worship with their whole hearts, how can the people be expected to ever learn? If the leaders don’t pray, how can the rest of the people learn to pray? If the leaders don’t meditate on the Scriptures to keep themselves on the way of life, how will the people learn to do that?
I think that’s the principle here. The Psalmist wants to call all Israel to praise God. Through Israel, God wants to reach all the world. But, it has to start somewhere. Someone has to lead. Someone has to not only tell others the importance of worship, but actually live it out in front of them!
“Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good; sing praise to his name, for that is pleasant.”
There are two ideas here: (1.) we are called to praise God because God is good (tov). This is “good” in the sense of “pleasing” or “desirable.”
And: (2.) we are called to praise God because such praise and worship are themselves pleasant (na‘iym). The word used here can also refer to beautiful music. Praise itself is beautiful, it lifts the heart. (And, by the way, I don’t really get why the NRSV reads it differently here.)
I find that there is a hunger within me for worship. Right at the moment Church involvement doesn’t sound so good to me. I feel conflicted about the local church and the institutional church — well, I mean the United Methodist Church in particular. But, I still want worship to be part of my life. I still want to rise in the morning and praise God. I still want to join with other Christians on Sundays to sing praise to God and to be instructed from the Scriptures.
Worship is pleasant because it turns my mind from myself to God. Worship is pleasant because it reminds me that life is about something greater than myself. Worship is pleasant because it reminds me to hope in God — for even if all other earthly hopes were to fail there would still be hope in God. In worship I align myself with God’s plan and purpose. No. I don’t perfectly understand what that is. In fact, I believe there is a plan and purpose greater than I can understand. We are here on earth for a purpose. The best we can do is align ourselves God — as best we can understand God. We praise the Name of the Lord.
“For the Lord has chosen Jacob for himself, Israel as his own possession.”
And, there is what Walter Brueggeman has sometimes called “the scandal of particularity.” God chose Israel. It was grace. Israel did not earn this grace. Grace cannot be earned anyway. It was not merit, it was grace.
God had to start somewhere. To reach the world, God began with Israel.
According to Deuteronomy 7:7-8 Moses said to Israel: “It was not because you were more numerous than any other people that the Lord set his heart on you and chose you—for you were the fewest of all peoples. It was because the Lord loved you and kept the oath that he swore to your ancestors, that the Lord has brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.” God didn’t love them because they were great. God loved them. And, God’s steadfast love made them great. Adam Clarke says: “It was no good in them that induced God to choose them at this time to be his peculiar people: he had his reasons, but these sprang from his infinite goodness. He intended to make a full discovery of his goodness to the world, and this must have a commencement in some particular place, and among some people. He chose that time, and he chose the Jewish people; but not because of their goodness or holiness.”
If God’s will is going to be done in this world, it has to start somewhere. It starts with you and me. Ordinary people called to serve an extraordinary God.
“Divine election starts with the utterly unpredictable choice of the enslaved people Israel, but continues in God’s continual choice of quite ordinary people for extraordinary tasks. Always their résumé and their skill-set are totally inadequate, but it is the very experience of being chosen that somehow empowers them.”
— Richard Rohr, Things Hidden: Scripture as Spirituality (page 164).
O God of surpassing goodness
It is pleasant to sing Your praises
and feel Your presence near.
Times have been dark and uncertain.
And, it is tempting to despair.
Even though despair itself leads nowhere.
Bring me back to You
Refresh my soul in worship.
May there still be those whom you call to lead.
May they lead faithfully by showing the way and living it.
Join me to Your will, Lord.
Empower me to do Your will.
And, may the whole world come to know Your mercy,
through Jesus Christ. Amen.
[Cross posted here: A Hunger for Worship.]
A Wesleyan Perspective on Human Sexuality
First, let me say a word about what I mean by using the term “Wesleyan.”
There is some latitude (in my view) in what it means to have a “Wesleyan” perspective. No one is likely to follow Wesley in everything he said. I’m quite willing to settle for a rather open & relaxed characterization of Wesleyan theology: it is a theology that takes its cues from the teaching and ministry of John Wesley.
And, in light of this, I ask the following.
Is there something distinctive about Wesleyan teaching that can give Christians guidance as we think about human sexuality? I think there is.
Because the Wesleyan approach to the Christian life speaks of the possibility of a the life of perfect love, I believe that a Wesleyan approach to the issue yields some important insights. Human nature is not inherently sinful just for being human. It is the power of love (devotion to God’s will and devotion to the best interests of others) that frees us from our sinfulness. This alone, and not legalisms or ascetic efforts, can set the heart free from its (otherwise) sinful intentions. It is a supernatural love: inspired in our hearts by God’s Holy Spirit through faith in Christ.
Specifically, let me begin with this excerpt from Wesley’s Sermon “On Perfection.” He poses the following question:
“‘But surely we cannot be saved from sin, while we dwell in a sinful body.”
And, answers it in these words:
“A sinful body? I pray observe, how deeply ambiguous; how equivocal, this expression is! But, there is no authority for it in Scripture: the word, sinful body, is never found there. And as it is totally unscriptural, so it is palpably absurd. For no body, or matter of any kind, can be sinful; spirits alone are capable of sin. Pray in what part of the body should sin lodge? It cannot lodge in the skin, nor in the muscles, or nerves, or veins, or arteries; it cannot be in the bones any more than in the hair or nails. Only the soul can be the seat of sin.”
— Sermons on Several Occasions, Vol. 2: “On Perfection.”
I feel this quote is especially significant, because it identifies human sinfulness as a spiritual, rather than a purely physical issue. This (I think) puts Wesleyans on a different path than much of the Augustinian tradition, which is more inclined to see the human sexual drive as itself a component of Original Sin. It also sets us on a different path than the NIV translators, who identify our human drives and tendencies (that is, what Paul calls our “flesh”) as being our “sinful nature.”
It becomes possible to give a positive account of human nature. It becomes possible to agree with God in pronouncing the human creation “very good” (Genesis 1:31).
Yes, human drives need to be disciplined. There are times (many times, really!) when we are called upon to say “no” to some human capacity for enjoyment. But, the ability to enjoy the things of life is not evil. It is good.
Most of our temptations arise from human appetites and drives of various sorts. We have the capacity to enjoy certain things. As long as we have that capacity we will be tempted to gratify these capacities and appetites in ways that are destructive to ourselves and others — and to our walk with God. As long as you love the taste of chocolate you will be tempted to indulge your love for chocolate in ways that are destructive to yourself: to your body, your teeth, etc. But, what a horrible thing it would be to lose the ability to enjoy chocolate! It would make life less enjoyable.
Most temptations are simply proof that we’re still alive and well and healthy, with the capacity to enjoy the good things of life.
And, how does insight this help us to give a theological account of human sexuality?
What I’m suggesting is a view of human sexuality which sees it as a capacity for perceiving wonder and beauty in human beings. As such, it is a good and wonderful thing.
My ability to perceive this is limited — by my sexual attractions and tastes (which are often a mystery even to myself) — but what I perceive in this way is true.
People really are beautiful. And, what I see only very selectively must be what God sees always and more generally. This sexual capacity is, at bottom, a pro-creative urge — and it is good that there is a relationship between affection, admiration (both physical & personal) and sexual attraction. This relationship exists (I think) to benefit the human race over-all.
But, the capacity to see wonder & beauty in human beings (legitimately recognized) does not authorize any particular actions on my part. No one was ever put on this earth to meet my needs or desires, and my desires must be subservient to what I believe is the higher good — as it relates to all people and all life.
“Therefore, do not let sin exercise dominion in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions. No longer present your members to sin as instruments of wickedness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and present your members to God as instruments of righteousness.” (Romans 6:12, 13 NRSV).
“Rapture” Theology – Part 2
As I said in the last installment: And — worse yet! — the centerpiece of this theory, the Pre-tribulational Rapture is nowhere explicitly taught in the Bible itself.
Detailed support for the above affirmation follows.
1. THE OLIVET DISCOURSE. (Mark 13, Matthew 24 & 25, Luke 21.) Jesus is giving instruction to his disciples here about the coming crisis in Jerusalem and about the end of time. Nowhere in this passage does he in any way hint of a “pre-trib rapture.” Quite the contrary! Rather than giving them assurance that they will be exempted from any tribulations that lie ahead, he is giving them warning about tribulations and seductions they will have to endure in the times to come. For example, notice this:
“Pray that this will not take place in winter, because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now — and never to be equaled again. If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them. At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘Look, there he is!’ do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect — if that were possible. So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.” (Mark 13:18-23 NIV).
The expectation here is that Christ’s followers will endure tribulation. Jesus tells them: “…[the one] who stands firm to the end will be saved.” (Mark 13:13 NIV). If exemption from the tribulations of the last days were the expectation (as it is among Christians in our day) this would have been a great place for Jesus to say so.
He says the opposite.
It appears from the Olivet Discourse that the time when Jesus will gather his followers to himself will also be the time of judgement upon the world.
“At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.” (Matthew 24:30-31 NIV).
It appears from this passage that the time of judgement upon the world will be the same as the time of the gathering the elect. In fact the Judgement aspect of Jesus coming (“all the nations of the earth will mourn”) is mentioned first. If the so-called Rapture and the time of Judgement were two different things, again, this would be a great place to say so. Again, it says the opposite. There is nothing here that teaches, implies, or even hints at a silent, secret Rapture of the Saints.
2. THE THESSALONIAN LETTERS. (1 & 2 Thessalonians)
The passage generally cited for a “pre-trib rapture” is 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18:
“Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord’s own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words.” (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 NIV).
This might seem to accord with the Dispensational view, but upon closer examination it doesn’t. Notice the very next sentences:
“Now, brothers, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. But you, brothers, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief.” (1 Thessalonians 5:1-4 NIV).
So, Paul’s teaching here is similar in structure to Jesus’ teaching. The time of being caught up together with the Lord is the same as the time of Judgement upon the world. Jesus return is spoken of as being like a “Thief in the Night” not because it is silent or secret, but because it is unexpected.
The same phenomenon can be noticed in 2 Thessalonians. The time when Christ is going to come for his people is spoken of as being the same when Judgement comes upon the world:
“All this is evidence that God’s judgment is right, and as a result you will be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering. 6 God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you.” (2 Thessalonians 1:5-10 NIV).
Then notice this a little way further:
“Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for [that day will not come] until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.” (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 NIV).
This passage says explicitly that “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” and “our being gathered to him” cannot occur until “the rebellion” (often identified with the “great tribulation” spoken of in the Synoptic Gospels) occurs first, and the “man of lawlessness” (often identified with the Antichrist spoken of in the letters of John) is revealed. This passage actually seems to disallow the possibility of a pre-trib Rapture (though I will acknowledge the great and imaginative efforts of Dispensational interpreters down through the years to make this somehow conform).
3. THE BOOK OF REVELATION. Nothing in the Book of Revelation itself necessitates the Pre-trib view. It is nowhere taught, though it has been read into some passages.
“After this I looked, and there before me was a door standing open in heaven. And the voice I had first heard speaking to me like a trumpet said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this.” (Revelation 4:1 NIV).
This is simply a transition in John’s visions. it is an experience that happened to John. I suppose it could be a pre-trib Rapture, but there is no reason to think that it is. The doctrine is being read into the passage.
There are numerous places in the Book of Revelation where the people of God are spoken of as enduring the tribulations of the Last Days. The oft-repeated maxim of the NT is “[the one} who stands firm to the end will be saved."
“After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no-one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. And they cried out in a loud voice: “Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.” All the angels were standing round the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshipped God, saying: ‘Amen! Praise and glory and wisdom and thanks and honor and power and strength be to our God for ever and ever. Amen!’ Then one of the elders asked me, ‘These in white robes — who are they, and where did they come from?’ I answered, ‘Sir, you know.’ And he said, ‘These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.’” (Revelation 7:9-14, NIV.)
Notice that the great multitude "from every nation, tribe, people and language" came out of "the great tribulation" — that is to say, they endured it (okay, or at least, part of it).
“He [the beast from the sea] was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation.” (Revelation 13:7 NIV)
“If anyone is to go into captivity, into captivity he will go. If anyone is to be killed with the sword, with the sword he will be killed. This calls for patient endurance and faithfulness on the part of the saints.” (Revelation 13:10 NIV.)
“This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God’s commandments and remain faithful to Jesus.” (Revelation 14:12 NIV.)
“I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus. When I saw her, I was greatly astonished.” (Revelation 17:6 NIV.)
To summarize:
- the Bible does not generally separate the “gathering together” and “judgement” aspects of Jesus’ Return
- the NT does not clearly promise that the “saints” or the “elect” will have any exemption from the tribulations of the last days,
- many passages in the NT are given to prepare the followers of Christ for times of tribulation,
- the pre-trib Rapture doctrine is an implication of the Dispensational theory of biblical interpretation (the current crop of believers must leave the earth at the next major Dispensational shift, so that God can return to working with Israel again) and has no basis in the Bible without it.
While, with great effort the relevant passages can be made to conform to the Dispensational view, they need not be read that way. In certain cases, the Dispensational view seems to run directly counter to the more natural sense of the passages in question.
Or, to put it more succinctly: The Pre-Tribulational Rapture is not a biblical doctrine.
But, the burning question for our day is: how do we recover the NT concept of Hope? How can we teach a credible doctrine of Hope for our generation?
“Rapture” Theology – Part 1
The concept of the “Rapture” has been a characteristic feature of conservative and evangelical Christian theology for a long time now. This doctrine that all true Christian believers will be removed from the world just before (or maybe within) a period of earthly Tribulation has become not only a standard feature of conservative Christianity, but also a phenomenon in the wider culture through the best selling Left Behind books.
Actually, the commonly-held doctrine of the Rapture is a feature of the Dispensational theological system. This system of thought began with John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), but was popularized in the early part of the 20th Century by C. I. Scofield and the extremely successful Scofield Reference Bible, first published in 1909.
Dispensational theology, with its distinctive doctrine of “two comings” of Christ is a 19th Century doctrinal innovation. It arose, I think, in response to growing pressure to see and interpret the Bible in light of its own history. Dispensationalism by-passed an historical approach to Scripture by (a.) interpreting the Bible in a strict literalistic sense, (b.) dividing the Bible history into dispensations in which God dealt with the world on different principles, (c.) asserting a strict dichotomy between Israel and the Church. Thus, there was no need to appeal to history or to a notion of Progressive Revelation. Bible books belonging to a previous dispensation did not directly relate to the present dispensation of grace. (You start to see some of the problems here when you consider that the teaching of Jesus itself, would, from this point of view, belong to a previous dispensation.)
Most people who have been trained in Biblical studies and theology believe the Dispensational schema to be false. You can find several refutations on the Internet. While the faculty of Dallas Theological Seminary defends this point of view (though sometimes in a significantly modified form from the teachings of Darby and Scofield), very few academic theologians defend this view, or even take it seriously.
It is generally ignored in major theological Seminaries. It is never even mentioned.
And that’s too bad. It is very much a “live” theological option out in the real world, whatever professional theologians may think of it.
I think this is some sort of academic-theology ego thing. Theology teachers need to get out of their ivory towers and mix with real folks once in a while. Dispensationalism is a live option out in the church and in our culture even though its academic-theology credentials are… um, … not so good. It sells a lot of books. More people read stuff like the Left Behind books (or The DaVinci Code, for that matter) than read respected academic theology.
Besides, academic theology is hard to read!
Yes, I much admire Wolfhart Pannenberg and Jürgen Moltmann (and many other Systematic and Biblical theologians). But, the writings of academic theologians are generally not accessible to average (or even in some cases, the above-average) lay reader. By contrast, Tim LaHaye has always written for the masses. Academic theologians tend to see Dispensationalism as beneath contempt, but that stance is arrogant — and it is not been helping the church at large. The rest of us encounter it quite commonly.
Like it or not, this is the dominant eschatology of our day. And what it tends to say to people is this: The world is going to the Devil (and his minion, the Antichrist) and if we are fortunate enough to be believers we will be “bailed out” by the Rapture before things get too awfully bad. No need to improve things on this evil world. It’s going to the Devil anyway.
And, I believe it has spilled over from Christianity to our secular culture, as well. The dominant secular “eschatology” is a vision of a bleak future: an overcrowded, oppressive world, or the world decimated by plague, or maybe nuclear holocaust and its aftermath.
It was a long time ago that Jürgen Moltmann wrote about a Theology of Hope. But, the concept of “hope” (i.e., a confident expectation of good in the future) is pretty foreign to a lot of Christians. And, the eschatology of gloom, doom, and despair is very much ingrained into our churches and our culture. This is the mythos of our age.
The pre-tribulational Rapture theory is, as I have said, the Dispensational view. In this view, all of salvation history is divided into Dispensations in which God worked in significantly different ways. The Dispensational view is an approach to the interpretation of the Bible that avoids historical & cultural & literary questions. Thus, it has a certain amount of appeal to folks who do not wish to see the Bible as having been historically & culturally conditioned by its times.
Any particular Bible verse is simply located within its proper Dispensation. God worked in different ways at different times. So, for example, God doesn’t call us to slaughter Canaanites anymore, that was the Word of God to Joshua and appropriate to a previous Dispensation when God was working in a different way. And so forth. (In the older Dispensational theory there were 7 dispensations in which God worked in a distinctively different way. I don’t know what they teach nowadays.) Thus, the Dispensational theory has an attraction to folks who hold to a more Literal-Dictation view of the Scriptures, since it irons out what might otherwise be seen as discrepancies in the Bible’s teachings. But, people who adopt an historical approach to the Bible have no need of the Dispensational theory.
The most fatal flaw in this is that the Dispensational theory is nowhere explicitly taught in the Bible itself. It’s advocates argue that the theory is needed in order to understand the Bible properly. Dispensational Baptist preacher H. A. Ironside called this “rightly dividing the Word of Truth.” But, how can they claim that this is necessary when it is nowhere explicitly taught in the Scriptures themselves? If this is so important why didn’t Jesus (or, failing that, the apostle Paul at least) clearly spell this out? The great irony here is that people who proclaim that their theology is based in the Bible alone actually depend upon an extra-biblical theory of interpretation to give their view coherence.
And — worse yet! — the centerpiece of this theory, the Pre-tribulational Rapture is nowhere explicitly taught in the Bible itself.
Detailed support for the above affirmation follows in Part 2.
Praying the Psalms
Many years ago, back in the days when I was in Seminary, I picked up an Interlinear Hebrew-English Psalter.
It’s one of the best purchases I’ve ever made.
It’s a small, slim volume, a 1974 Zondervan reprint of a much older edition published by Samuel Bagster & Sons Ltd. in London. The correct title is: The Interlineary Hebrew and English Psalter in which The Construction of Every Word is Indicated, and the Root of Each Distinguished by the Use of Hollow or Other Types.
I liked the little book immediately, because it is printed in a way that clearly indicated the Hebrew roots and constructions. I knew immediately that I’d made a good purchase.
But, it was many years before I actually put it to any regular use.
Somewhere, some time, I learned to use the Psalms as my Prayer Book. I no longer remember when I stumbled across this technique of prayer. For years I had found it hard to spend extended periods of time in prayer. My mind wandered (of course). Silence was comforting to me at first. But, the time would often pass slowly. Some days I seemed to have nothing to say.
I began to pray the Psalms.
I would read a verse or two. I would meditate upon it. I would pray. I would intercede for the many people on my heart. And, at the point where I caught my mind wandering (as it so naturally does) I would come back to the Psalm again. The process would begin again.
And, this is where my Interlinear Hebrew and English Psalter came in so handy. It allowed me to actually meditate on the original words of the Psalm. It forced me to slow down. It forced me to read each word. It forced me to reconstruct the meaning of the sentences. It suggested new possibilities of meaning that I might not have seen in translation.
(A stodgy, literal translation like the New American Standard Bible will produce much the same effect, for those who have no knowledge of Hebrew. But, bear in mind, an Interlinear Bible only requires a rudimentary knowledge of the original language.)
And, I began to feel that my prayers were a dialogue with God. I spoke to God. I listened for the echo of God speaking in the Psalm.
You see, I feel like I hear the Psalms in an echo chamber. I don’t know how else to describe it. It echos with the history of Israel. It echos with the life of David, and so many ancient hopes that were pinned on him. It echos with all the varied emotions of the human heart: joy, laughter, sorrow, despair. It echos down through all the history of the Christian faith, as believers have turned to these ancient songs for guidance and inspiration. Because I see the Psalms through a Christ-lens, they yield levels of meaning to me because I see them in the light of a certain, particular fulfillment.
And, in that sense I’m not alone. These songs of faith and devotion, doubt and despair, are the property of a community of faith that has read and cherished them through ages of time.
And, here they lie in front of me. Ancient words, carefully preserved by Masoretic scribes, who added markings so that even their accents and pronunciations might be preserved. It’s really quite amazing if you think about it.
My God,
Thank you for the gift of the Word
and these particular words
very human and yet divine
an ancient and living part of your redemptive plan
a gift to me today.
Lord,
I do not understand
my prejudices and preconceptions run deep
I am so quick to defend my ideas
so often arrogant and fearful
(maybe they are the same thing)
I am easily distracted;
Inspire me
Teach me your ways.
May your Word
find an entrance into my heart
today. Amen.
An Introduction: My Story
I appreciate Derek’s invitation (conveyed via Facebook) to be a part of the Covenant of Love blog.
The following is intended as an introduction of sorts. I’ve often noticed over the years, that a person’s theological viewpoint is often decisively shaped by their spiritual history.
It’s true for me as well. To understand where I’m “coming from” it helps to understand where I’ve been — and to understand what the shaping influences on my Christian experience have been.
Revivalism was actually a very important part of my early Christian experience. So, as a result, there is a special place in my heart for Camp-meeting and revival meetings. The formative Christian experiences of my adolescence were closely related to these experiences. I know a lot of people feel differently about it. But, I’m eternally grateful to the people who first conveyed the Gospel of Christ to me.
I’m afraid I’ve drifted away. While our family lived in the Boyne City area, I was president of the local Camp-meeting Association for a brief time. But, by and large, since entering the pastoral ministry, I have not attended camp-meeting in the summer. And, yes, I do feel that something is missing.
Now, let me be clear. I’m not talking about church camp. That’s a wonderful thing, too, but I never knew about that until I was an adult — and was asked to serve as a camp counselor. Sad to say, I don’t think that as a child or a teen anyone could have successfully even dragged me to church camp.
As a child, I was lost in the church. I was sent to Sunday school. Later, I was sent to confirmation class. I was sent to youth meetings. I was confirmed in the Congregational (U.C.C.) church. But, in my estimation, the Church had nothing to offer. It seemed to be a sterile and pointless institution. It seemed like an organization of people engaged in the pitiful attempt to hold on to the forms, symbols and rituals of a faith they no longer (and perhaps had never) believed. They sought to make relevant a Book whose acknowledged mistakes, distortions and falsehoods made it an unlikely source of authority.
An unfair accusation? No doubt. Maybe I shouldn’t have “written off’” the Church so quickly. But, please remember that the worst thing we can do to the Gospel is to make it look false, empty, boring and irrelevant to daily life.
So camp-meeting hit me pretty hard. There I heard some fiery and enthusiastic evangelistic preaching. Evangelists there spoke of a Gospel that was genuinely related to the struggles of my life. These people really seemed to believe that the Bible’s message was true. It was there I heard how faith in Jesus Christ related to personal guilt, decision-making, and daily life. There I heard about a real God with a genuine love for all people. My attention was now directed to the power, truth and relevancy of the very Book my Sunday school teachers had found embarrassing. I was told that Jesus Christ could change my life and give me a reason to live. I needed that. In fear and trembling, I responded to the invitation. The pastor of the Methodist church our family had been attending made his way forward to pray with me. It was a step I have never since regretted.
Time has passed. Much has happened since those days. My outlook has changed in many ways. But, what the evangelist at camp-meeting told me was true. There is a God of love. There is a revelation from God. By faith in Christ, there is a life of peace, hope and love. I’m glad someone told me that.
Are camp-meetings (and revival meetings) an anachronism? They were a great evangelistic strategy of nineteenth century frontier revivalism. They were once the heart and soul of American Methodism. But, many of the great camp-meetings are no longer in existence. Some of those that still remain have an uncertain future. But, what has taken their place? Where now is the point of entry for people like me who were lost in Church? Where now are we gathering together to call people to new commitments & into a deeper life of faith? Yes, some camp-meetings still survive. Yes, there are newer movements like the Lay Witness Mission or the Emmaus Walk and so forth. But, I wonder if we are really doing all we should to help people find reality, strength, and spiritual depth in their faith.
I have not forgotten the debt I owe to those who told me the story of God’s love in Jesus Christ. It is because of the truth, power and relevancy of that message that I continue to remember these experiences with gratitude. Long ago someone preached a message of hope and faith to me. I’d like to do that same favor for others.
[I maintain a web site here: http://web.me.com/craigadams1 The information and opinion I post here can also be found over there — somewhere.]
