Now that I am no longer participating in a major online group, I thought I would try and turn my attention once again to putting up more blogs. Since I graduated from seminary, I can now read what I want. Left to my own devices, I would probably just read fiction and escape into a world that doesn’t offer as much stress, but I have found that I need to read non-fiction also and keep up with my own intellectual growth. What works for me is to rotate fiction and non-fiction. Today, I would like to introduce to you a tool that I have been using for a while now that helps me keep track of the books that I want to read. I have posted a new link on my blog will take you to Google Books. The link is under "Blogroll" (although I might move it later) and says ""My Google Library." Google Books has allowed me to stay more organized in regards to books that I hear about and want to check out. Here is the problem for me: I only have so much time and I am quite convinced that if I read every book recommended to me that I would not have enough time left in the rest of my life, even if I quit my job. I always have people tell me, “You need to read this; it’s a good book!” Well, there are lots of good books and I am not interested in reading good books. I am interested in reading the best books. That's really all the time that I have.
As far as fiction goes, I have on order the ninth book in the eleven-book Timeline 191 series by Harry Turtledove. According to the Wikipedia article, “Timeline-191 is a fan name given to a series of Harry Turtledove alternate history novels, including How Few Remain as well as the Great War, American Empire, and Settling Accounts series. The name is derived from Robert E. Lee's Special Order 191, which detailed the Army of Northern Virginia's invasion of the Union in September 1862 during the American Civil War. The divergence occurs when Union forces do not find a copy of Special Order 191, on September 10, 1862. The novels detail the consequences of this up until 1944 in the alternate world.” The ninth book in the series is the second book in the tetralogy, Settling Accounts and it is entitled, Settling Accounts: Drive To The East. After I finish my current read, I will be delving into this book and hope to have the entire series finished by the end of the year. I have been reading this series since 2007! As I said, seminary never really let me read what I wanted to so while I was in class, so I stopped reading fiction and pretty much only read assigned books with a few exceptions. After I finish the “191” series, I hope to read the two books that I have not read yet by John Grisham, who is, without a doubt, my favorite author. The two I have not yet read are Ford County, which is a collection of short stories, and his new upcoming book, The Confession.
As far as non-fiction goes, I have two loves/interests. The first, of course, is theology. I want to keep up my interest and keep myself informed and balanced on this subject. This is the book I am currently reading called The Christian Atheist. It was given to me by a friend for graduation. So far it is very good. I also have on order Axiom: Powerful Leadership Proverbs which was also recommended to me by a friend. This book would fall into one those “exception” categories I was talking about. Every now and then, a book comes along that I just want to read more than what my system will allow. Because of the nature of this book being in short chapters, I will probably read it on the side while I am reading other books. Generally, I only read one book at a time, unless they are two very distinctly different books. I once tried reading two fiction books at the same time and ended up getting the stories crossed.
The other love/interest is history, particularly American history. Because of this, I have set a goal of reading a book on each of the Presidents of the United States…yes, even the bad ones! I have currently read one on Washington, Adams, and Jefferson and will be reading one on James Madison after I finish Drive To The East.
As you can see, my reading list keeps me quite busy. I am hoping that, at some point in my life, I will enjoy reading more than television, but that has not happened…yet. I would encourage all of you to be veracious readers, most importantly, of God’s Word, but also, of other books as well. I have met Christians who will not read anything other than Christian non-fiction. Not to be critical, but generally speaking, these have been some of the most unimaginative people I have ever met. Reading fiction really keeps my imagination in the right place and it also helps me escape to a world that is unfamiliar and engaging. Like I said, fiction is my favorite. Another thing that I would suggest is to read books that you know you will probably disagree with. If you click on the link, you will see that one of the books on my list is Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities by Roger Olson. I heard Olson interviewed on “Converse With Scholars” a while back and was very impressed with his knowledge of this subject and made a point to read him, even though I know I will probably not agree with him. How else can I engage in a conversation with someone of a more-Arminian persuasion if I do not know anything about the subject? Reading something you disagree with also fires up your own imagination and helps you to continue to think critically. So check out my Google Books library and let me know what you think.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Friday, July 9, 2010
Biblical Lessons from Lebron and Lindsay
So all of Ohio is buzzing about Lebron James’ decision to not return to the Cavaliers. Dan Gilbert has posted an online letter blasting Lebron which just seems to show a severe lack of professionalism. It really is just symptomatic of what truly is the issue here. On my way out to lunch a couple of days ago, I caught the opening of Rush Limbaugh when he said with his tongue firmly planted in his cheek that no one seemed to be reporting that Lindsay Lohan had obscenities written on her fingernails during her recent court appearance where she was sentenced to 90 days in jail. Of course, Limbaugh was being facetious. It seems that the news has been buzzing non-stop about Lebron and Lindsay.
Why are we so shocked as a nation when our heroes let us down? We lift them up like demi-gods and expect them to do no wrong and when they eventually screw up, we chastise them for their behavior. Our expectations are so high when it comes to the cult of celebrity in our culture that when their shiny façade is shattered, so is our trust in all of humanity. It’s time for a gut check here, people. The only good inside of us is the good that God placed there. We cannot be flabbergasted when unbelievers do sinful things. It’s in their nature. For that matter, we cannot be shocked when believers do sinful things. We will, of course, be more disappointed when one of our own fumbles, but we are still only human and we will all eventually do some really stupid and sinful things that we are ashamed of. It might not be as public and humiliating as, say Ted Haggard for instance, but at some point in our life and even some point in our Christian life, we will let somebody down.
Psalm 9:9-10 says, “The Lord is a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble. And those who know your name put their trust in you, for you, O Lord, have not forsaken those who seek you.” If you trusted in Lindsay Lohan’s squeaky-clean childhood image to get her through life, you have been severely disappointed. If Ohioans put their trust in Lebron to stay in Ohio, they were severely disappointed last night. Gilbert went so far as to say that Lebron “deserted” the Cavaliers.[1] Here is a blessed and biblical truth: God will never desert you. He will never forsake you. He will never leave you. He is the only one…let me write it again ‘cause I’m getting excited and wish I could shout this from a pulpit right now…He is the only One who we can always trust and will never let us down!
So put down your People, your US Weekly, and any other celebrity-worshipping magazine and pick up your Bible and read the words of a God who will always do what He says, no matter what. He’s proven it in the past and you can read all about it. He will do it again and you can read all about that, too. He’s the God who is loyal to the end, regardless of the circumstances and he won’t leave you for a better contract or the chance to win a championship. He’s already won!
[1] http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2010/07/gilberts_letter_to_fans_james.html
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Why I Am No Longer Charismatic
Yesterday, I posted a blog about why I am no longer reformed. Today, I want to talk about something else I am not. I am no longer charismatic. I need to take a moment here and define these terms so that you know what I am saying.
At one point in my life, I used to consider myself a Pentecostal. I had an experience in 1999 where I professed to have received the baptism in the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues. Pentecostals, historically and theologically coming out of the Methodist/Holiness movement, believe that all believers can have this second blessing and that if you have this blessing, you will speak in tongues. For Pentecostals, this is a staple in their theology. Theologically, speaking in tongues, for the Pentecostal, is not an option; it is a command for all believers to pursue. Like I said, I used to define myself as a Pentecostal, but I do not think that I ever fully believed this. I had to categorize my experience and at the time, that is where I chose to categorize it. Later on, I moved into what is now traditionally known as charismatic theology. I believed that certain believers were given the gift of tongues, but others were not. Historically speaking, charismatic believers rose out of mainline denominations in the 50's and 60's during what is known as the Charismatic Renewal. For the majority of the last decade, this was my stance on this issue.
There is another category, mostly for historic purposes, called the Third Wave. If you wanted to pigeon-hole me, I would be the closest to this category, but what I have found is that as my beliefs have evolved, my emphasis has become less on having one particular manifestation of a gift on a person and more on generally allowing the Holy Spirit to move the way that He wills. Because of this, I now believe that tongues will manifest themselves at the Spirit's enablement and I do not really get into people seeking after them. I believe that believers need to know that all gifts are relevant today, but per Corinthians, I would much rather see people excel in gifts that build up the church. As such, I de-emphasize tongues to make it even with the other gifts and as such, I do not believe that I could be called a charismatic. Perhaps I am wrong about that, but while at one point in my life, I would have major issues belonging to a church that did not "practice the gifts," I no longer have those qualms. My concern is that people have a general openness to whatever the Holy Spirit wants to do in their lives.
The beauty of about growing theologically is that it is like an onion; you just keep peeling off layers and layers until you get underneath all of it. My opinions on being charismatic may change again, but right now, this is where I’m at and I’m very grateful to be here.
At one point in my life, I used to consider myself a Pentecostal. I had an experience in 1999 where I professed to have received the baptism in the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues. Pentecostals, historically and theologically coming out of the Methodist/Holiness movement, believe that all believers can have this second blessing and that if you have this blessing, you will speak in tongues. For Pentecostals, this is a staple in their theology. Theologically, speaking in tongues, for the Pentecostal, is not an option; it is a command for all believers to pursue. Like I said, I used to define myself as a Pentecostal, but I do not think that I ever fully believed this. I had to categorize my experience and at the time, that is where I chose to categorize it. Later on, I moved into what is now traditionally known as charismatic theology. I believed that certain believers were given the gift of tongues, but others were not. Historically speaking, charismatic believers rose out of mainline denominations in the 50's and 60's during what is known as the Charismatic Renewal. For the majority of the last decade, this was my stance on this issue.
There is another category, mostly for historic purposes, called the Third Wave. If you wanted to pigeon-hole me, I would be the closest to this category, but what I have found is that as my beliefs have evolved, my emphasis has become less on having one particular manifestation of a gift on a person and more on generally allowing the Holy Spirit to move the way that He wills. Because of this, I now believe that tongues will manifest themselves at the Spirit's enablement and I do not really get into people seeking after them. I believe that believers need to know that all gifts are relevant today, but per Corinthians, I would much rather see people excel in gifts that build up the church. As such, I de-emphasize tongues to make it even with the other gifts and as such, I do not believe that I could be called a charismatic. Perhaps I am wrong about that, but while at one point in my life, I would have major issues belonging to a church that did not "practice the gifts," I no longer have those qualms. My concern is that people have a general openness to whatever the Holy Spirit wants to do in their lives.
The beauty of about growing theologically is that it is like an onion; you just keep peeling off layers and layers until you get underneath all of it. My opinions on being charismatic may change again, but right now, this is where I’m at and I’m very grateful to be here.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Why I Am No Longer Reformed
For a while now, I have been considering making a major theological change. Really, it is more of a recognition of something that has been on my heart for awhile. Since 2003, I have been a member of a group online defining itself as being both reformed and charismatic. I joined the group in early 2003 after leaving the Assemblies of God church that I was a member of because of the discovery that I was a Calvinist. But much has happened in the last seven years and just moments ago, after having been called names and accused of some rather vicious things, I made the decision to leave the group, no longer being able to tolerate the growing divisive attitude in the group. Some of you think, “Big deal…it’s just an online group,” but it was much more that to me. They were very intregal in helping to shape my theology and many people on the board are great people. I just realized that the terms “reformed” and “charismatic” were terms that I was hiding behind and I also believe that many in that group and in the reformed camp are guilty of the same thing.
So let’s just get this out in the open: I am no longer reformed, but let me tell you what I mean by that. The fact is, I may never have been. One pastor on that board posted a definition of “reformed” that included being a member of a reformed denomination. I do not agree fully with this person’s position, but will grant him the point that since I have never been a member of a denomination that is reformed, you could make that case. The church that I grew up in was Southern Baptist. I attended a Pentecostal Baptist church (yes, I wrote that right) while in undergrad before we joined the Assemblies of God Church. The church that I became affiliated with while in seminary was the Evangelical Free Church. It takes no official position on Calvinism or Arminianism. Our membership is currently at The Chapel in North Canton, Ohio and while it does not take an official position, the doctrine that is taught is primarily of a Baptist flavor and most likely a hybrid of Calvinism and Arminianism. As I said, if that is your definition of reformed, then I have never been reformed. However, I have tentatively embraced all five points of Calvinism. I have described myself though as a "questioning Calvinist." I have a lot of questions particularly in regards to the doctrine of Limited Atonement. I firmly now believe that Jesus died for all of humanity, not just the elect. The best explanation of this is Driscoll's explanation of "unlimited limited atonement," but that isn't the only question that I have. The others seem rather minor compared to that one. Anyway, my point is that since I embrace all five points of Calvinism, I did consider myself reformed. The reason that I no longer consider myself reformed is that it seems that those who want or desire to be labeled as "reformed" seem to think that the Reformation stopped around the 16th century. No, it continues today. We are to be "ever reforming" in the best sense of the reformers. We are to be on offense, not always on defense, defending the fortress of Calvinism. I have observed that the current state of the reformed camp places more emphasis on defending the fort, than advancing onto new ground. My desire is to bring people to Jesus, not necessarily to some academic agreement to a particular theology. I'll still teach and preach that God is sovereign in all things, but I'll let the Holy Spirit deal with the specifics in each individual believer's heart. I still believe that theology is important; indeed, I believe it is everything, but I'm not here to shove it down their throats and I will not break fellowship with those who believe differently that I do on that issue. I do not believe that Calvinism or "being reformed" is the gospel. The gospel is John 3:16.
So there you have it. I’m not even sure if I was ever reformed, but you know what? I don’t really care anymore. I just want to love and serve Jesus. At the end of my life, I am not going to be asked whether or not I am a reformed or a Calvinist. What matters is what I do with Jesus. That means everything.
So let’s just get this out in the open: I am no longer reformed, but let me tell you what I mean by that. The fact is, I may never have been. One pastor on that board posted a definition of “reformed” that included being a member of a reformed denomination. I do not agree fully with this person’s position, but will grant him the point that since I have never been a member of a denomination that is reformed, you could make that case. The church that I grew up in was Southern Baptist. I attended a Pentecostal Baptist church (yes, I wrote that right) while in undergrad before we joined the Assemblies of God Church. The church that I became affiliated with while in seminary was the Evangelical Free Church. It takes no official position on Calvinism or Arminianism. Our membership is currently at The Chapel in North Canton, Ohio and while it does not take an official position, the doctrine that is taught is primarily of a Baptist flavor and most likely a hybrid of Calvinism and Arminianism. As I said, if that is your definition of reformed, then I have never been reformed. However, I have tentatively embraced all five points of Calvinism. I have described myself though as a "questioning Calvinist." I have a lot of questions particularly in regards to the doctrine of Limited Atonement. I firmly now believe that Jesus died for all of humanity, not just the elect. The best explanation of this is Driscoll's explanation of "unlimited limited atonement," but that isn't the only question that I have. The others seem rather minor compared to that one. Anyway, my point is that since I embrace all five points of Calvinism, I did consider myself reformed. The reason that I no longer consider myself reformed is that it seems that those who want or desire to be labeled as "reformed" seem to think that the Reformation stopped around the 16th century. No, it continues today. We are to be "ever reforming" in the best sense of the reformers. We are to be on offense, not always on defense, defending the fortress of Calvinism. I have observed that the current state of the reformed camp places more emphasis on defending the fort, than advancing onto new ground. My desire is to bring people to Jesus, not necessarily to some academic agreement to a particular theology. I'll still teach and preach that God is sovereign in all things, but I'll let the Holy Spirit deal with the specifics in each individual believer's heart. I still believe that theology is important; indeed, I believe it is everything, but I'm not here to shove it down their throats and I will not break fellowship with those who believe differently that I do on that issue. I do not believe that Calvinism or "being reformed" is the gospel. The gospel is John 3:16.
So there you have it. I’m not even sure if I was ever reformed, but you know what? I don’t really care anymore. I just want to love and serve Jesus. At the end of my life, I am not going to be asked whether or not I am a reformed or a Calvinist. What matters is what I do with Jesus. That means everything.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)