If it were laid upon me….

I sat on this post for awhile due to the issues described  here,  internally debating whether or not I should post it. After all, how could I authentically speak to issues of ecclesiology if I struggled with doubts of even belonging to the church militant?  Without regards to such issues, I decided to unveil my thoughts, anyway.

If I ever were to pastor a church, which would only happen if God has a great sense of irony and loves to use the weak, the foolish, those prone to sin and despises it, and those with no leadership or interpersonal skills, these are some things I would insist upon:

• Sundays would not be a polished affair with state-of-the-art audio and visual accouterments. Musical instruments would probably be in the back of the church. Focus is to be on the Word unfolded so as to feed the sheep, not on a musical performance.  I would refuse to play any music that was programmed to draw in people who would not otherwise go to church.

• I would never, never, never, ever lay the burden of the  tithe, an unbiblical practice as taught by the contemporary church,  upon the sheep. I will not pastor over the church of Galatia. There would be relatively few sermons or speeches on financial stewardship. Though important, you don’t need Jesus to teach you to balance your checkbook and save for a rainy day. Plus…I am not so good with money, myself. It just does not mean that much to me as it does others.

• I would probably be bi-vocational.

• There would be no sermons with seven steps to this or five keys to that. Legalism lite leads to Jesus lite. Legalism is a path that leads to Hell

• I would do my best to talk a lot about Christ using few if any personal anecdotes. I want you to learn about the Messiah, not about me. If I cannot teach redemptive Biblical history, the historical and true story of Christ alone, by faith alone, by grace alone, by the authority of the Bible alone, to the glory of God alone without telling stories about me and my life experience (boring thought it would be), I do not need to claim to be a pastor. If I ever become a pastor, which is highly unlikely,  I will not be there to entertain you. When I die, I would just as soon be forgotten then be remembered as having been a charismatic leader.

• I would not ask for your personal testimonies, though you are certainly free to share – but, foremost, tell me Christ’s story in church, not yours. Your changed life, though I am happy for you, is not necessarily the Gospel. Paxil changes lives, AA changes lives, art changes lives, Mormonism has changed lives for the better. The Gospel story is what breaths life into rotten corpses. The apostle Peter probably had many interesting stories, but he told Christ’s story every time, all the time.

• There would never, never, ever be any altar call nor any other crass emotional manipulation of the flock. If Jesus and the apostles did not need them, then neither do I need that extra-biblical and rather recent and often detrimental appendage to the Gospel call. No. Sappy. Music. In. Church. Ever. Too, why do I need to close my eyes and bow my head during altar calls? Seriously….

• I would seek to heal you with the Gospel rather the Law. Too many preachers wield the Law like an anvil against the sheep when a salve of grace is called for.

• Preaching would be mostly expostional. Exceptions to expostional preaching might entail, for example, teaching about the lives and doctrines of the early church fathers and martyrs. I would also like to learn and teach on church history. Doing a class on systematic theology in the evenings would be cool, too. Theology is a fundamental part of the church. If I ever pastored a church, it would be lovingly doctrinal. Doctrine is the spine and immune system of the church.

• I would strongly discourage the turning of hobbies into ministries. You like to golf, hunt, and ride motorcycles. Such is fine with me; just don’t baptize them. Let me know when you want to go for a ride though. It would be fun to join with you.

• The crippled, the poor, the mentally ill and emotionally scarred, those not so articulate would welcomed and embraced.   Along the same lines, introverts are welcome and loved. I understand because I am an introvert, too. If you are uncomfortable in certain social circumstances, we can fellowship, you and me, over a cup of coffee or can of beer where ever you are most comfortable. I personally like sweet tea. Occasionally, a shot or two of Evan Williams is fine. Church is not easy, sometimes, for introverts.

• I would insist that the elders and teachers hold the the Doctrines of Grace. If not, you can be a part of the church, cherished and loved deeply, but never teach.

• No. Skits. Ever. No drama teams, either. You want drama, entertainment, go to a theater. The Word, being potent in and of itself, does not need our help. Drama merely adds extraneous layers. As an aside, it amazes me that people can feel comfortable playing the role of Christ in musical dramas and plays. I recall Peter requesting his body to be crucified upside down because he deemed himself to be unworthy to be crucified in the fashion of the Messiah.

• I would not make too big a deal about secondary issues such as eschatology, though they would not be ignored.

• Communion would be a real meal, I think, not a piece of bread or a plastic shot glass of grape juice. Wine would be available if desired. I also am not wed to the amount of water used in baptisms. Sprinkle or dunk, I can accommodate either. No major problems with either paedo and credo-baptism. I see valid Biblical arguments for either, though I lean towards credo-baptism.

• I would never say, as many do from the stage and pulpit, that I would not sacrifice my family for of the church, though I would hope I would never face such circumstances. Such statements, though common, seem strange and present a hopefully false dichotomy. I would die a thousand times for the church of the Christ. If my wife or children are not with me on this, then they turn their backs on the bride and body of Christ. I would not.

• I will not be a Christian culture warrior, ever. I will not try to dress unregenerate corpses up with the Law when they need the Gospel. You want a moral nation above all, have Utah succeed and move there. They are nice, family-friendly, moral people even without the Gospel delivered by the apostles. I would never preach pure moralism. It is the anti-thesis of grace.

• Children will not have to go to kids church when big people church starts if the family wants their children to be with them. Distractions are OK, to a degree, and a part of life, and a part of the body, a part of families. You hear me on this one Furtick and Noble​? I will not force families to split up when the preaching starts. Shame on you, Furtick, for removing Christ from your service for being a distraction to your show…..as you do the the least of these……

• I would probably not let my church grow much beyond 200 people if I had such control. Should it do so, and this would be a great thing, we split into two sister churches, each with trained and approved elders and pastors. If a pastor cannot at least recognize his sheep, he needs to have others step up to help feed, lead and shelter the flock. Move half of them to another pasture.  Keep growing the flock, and then splitting off to new pastures.

• Naive on my part, perhaps, but I would hope the hypothetical church I fed would not be success oriented with tangible metrics. Leave that for businesses. I would not count salivations. That is no ones job but the Holy Spirits; no one else is qualified to separate wheat from chaff. I would hope we would have an orientation of humility. If the seats are filled, fine. If not, fine. It will be Christ who grows His church, not me.

• I would literally die to protect my sheep from wolves, from bad theology. You will not see Wild At Heart or The Shack as recommended reading the churches library. I would never endorse heretics like TD Jakes as have many nominally orthodox pastors.

• I would never, ever have a fund raiser. If someone is in deep financial need, I would sell my possessions, give up vacations, and work overtime to help you. I hope the flock would do the same. Saddest thing I have seen in a long time is a large, evidently wealthy church holding a bake sale fund raiser for a child needing surgery.

• If you want to volunteer to help in the church, that is great. If not, that is fine with me, too. I know your probably work hard to support your family and need no extra burdens. Quite frankly, when you get rid of all the extraneous parking teams, media teams, creative teams, hospitality teams, volunteer coordination team volunteers, you find you do not need volunteers so much.

• Small groups, meh. I have seen them too often be pools of ignorance to which, not so long ago, I helped make even more deeply ignorant. If we do small groups, it will be elder led and Word focused. They are what you make of them.

• If you want a God of second chances, go to where the Gospel is light and cheap. I will give you a Gospel for dead men and women who float hopeless in the dark waters. They don’t need second chances. I, and they, would mess up the second chance, and the third, and the forth. I will point you to a Savior, to paraphrase Paul Capon, if memory serves, who dives into deep water to breath life into sin infused, rotten corpses, dies in the process, and later appears on the shore alive and waits for you having defeated death and sin.

Enough of my orthopraxic utopianism…

Perhaps just for awhile

To the few who read this blog on a regular basis, there may be a change of its core content and in its direction for a while as I work through some rather difficult theological issues and wrestle with some personal issues that are fellow travelers with the aforementioned and unmentioned theological issues.

What I hope may eventually be birthed from this caldron is perhaps chapter four of An Ecclesiastical Journey, something I have been wanting to do for quite a while. I hope for a more firmly grounded faith. On the other hand, I may end up in another space altogether as I try piece some foundational things back together.  Failing to find a way to do so will leave me with no option but to sadly walk away from what I have held dear for the last few years. What I will journey to if I cannot piece it all together, well I am not so sure.

Cryptic, I know, and I could ramble on, but that is the best I can do for now.

In the interim, I may do some more writing on evolution, Darwinism, ID and creationism. I may also indulge in more hobby related blogging. Time will tell.

February 28, Part Two

I know I am probably beating this subject to death and will be a bit repetitive with this post, but I am absolutely infuriated by the often errant implications and the scripture twisting that are fellow travelers with this doctrine. It is not an issue of money for me. It is not an issue of obedience for me. It is not an issue of stewardship. It is, ultimately, an issue of Law and Gospel, or more specifically, a confusion of the two. I am, again, talking about tithing.

Here is, verbatim, part of a sermon on money, on tithing, I recently watched. The sermon by Perry Noble is found here and the quoted section starts at approximately one hour and two minutes into the sermon.

In exodus 13, God says the firstborn is mine, and then the passover took place, and the people that did not put the blood over the door frame and said I’m not going to consecrate my son to you, what happened to the son in that house? He got killed. Your either gonna give your 10 percent to God or He’s gonna take it. The Bible says God will not be mocked. For some of you, there’s a reason your car keeps breaking down. There’s a reason you cant keep your kid out of the doctors office. There’s a reason you cant keep a job. You’re trying to mock god.

Such is, unfortunately, not a unique approach to the subject. I have heard similar sentiments from other pastors, and I spoke on it just recently here. My first and overarching thought on the above quote is thus: The pastor portrays a grievous and confused understanding of Law and Gospel.

Let me say it one more time just so that I am not misunderstood: He Does Not Really Understand Grace. And it’s not just him. Again, I have heard the same sentiment from other stages and pulpits, and I would say the same thing about others who infer that God acts like a mobster running a protecting racket on His own children. What we find in this sermon is essentially a quid pro quo Gospel. Christ did this, so you gotta do that.

What I see from the aforementioned sermon are verses ripped out of context and used as proof-text to prop up an errant pretext. But, as this pastor graciously and humbly mentions at one hour into the video, you must be stupid and Biblically illiterate if you disagree with him on this subject. Be that as it may…

Going off a bit tangentially, I think the overarching issues is one of methodology. Some preachers are topical teachers, speaking often to the felt needs of the audience. Others are expositional teachers. Topical preachers tend to hover over the Scripture and pick verses, often out of context, to communicate some point, often a favorite subject of the pastor.  They, by their methodology, become lord over the text. Expositional preaching, where the pastor goes through a book of the Bible verse by verse, is bound to the Word and it forces the preacher to open the word, in context, to the congregation. The text is lord over the pastor.

I want to be clear that I am not so much anti-tithe, but more anti-how the tithe is often taught. I know of Christians who give their ten percent as a holy act of worship. Personally, I do not think the percentage is as important as the condition of one’s hearts.

Speaking of how the tithe is taught, here is a video that might be of  interest:

Christian, you do not have to tithe to ‘earn’ God’s favor. There is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. You are not blessed because of your obedience to the Law, you are justified by grace alone, by faith alone, by Christ alone.

This is not healthy truth:

Radical Grace is Life!

Addendum:

Just uploaded the section of the sermon to which I refer to YouTube. So much error and mishandling of scripture. I honestly fear for Perry. Here is the video:

I Timothy 1:7 – “They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.

 

For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith. (Galatians 3:10-14 ESV)

Currently Reading…

Alexander Carson, quoted in Trusting God: Even When Life Hurts by Gerald Bridges and Jerry Bridges

God’s sovereignty is always to his people in wisdom and in love. This is he difference between sovereignty in God and sovereignty in man. We dread the sovereignty of man, because we have no security of its being exercised in mercy, or even justice: we rejoice in the sovereignty of God, because we are sure it is always exercised for the good of his people.

Almost finished with this book, and  must say that this is one of the reads I have encountered in quite a while….engagingly theological, applicable, full of grace and truth.  Steeped in Scripture, it sparks a deeper love for and trust in the Messiah.  As time allows, I will probably post some thoughts on this book.

Another church sign

Stating the obvious, bumper stickers and church signs are often poor venues for declarations requiring nuance, and perhaps one should not put too much effort in analyzing them.  That being said, I ran across a church sign near my house recently that read  “Too Blessed to be Depressed.” These are the same guys whose sign once read “God’s Stimulus Package: The Rapture.” (more on it here) After reading this sign I thought of  the following verses and the tensions contained therein.

Matthew 5:1-4 (NASB)

When Jesus saw the crowds, He went up on the mountain; and after He sat down, His disciples came to Him. He opened His mouth and began to teach them, saying, Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

I think about the inference of that sign that it is normative that Christians should always be happy and never depressed.  What that sign can  be is a slap in the face to someone who mourns.  There are strains of Christianity that really think that Christians are never to be in any kind of want, physical or otherwise.  In light of that church sign, I find it ironic that there is a book in the Bible titled Lamentations.  The Psalms are full of lament; some flirt with utter despair. Psalm 88 comes to mind.

Here are a couple of pertinent quotes that I ran across recently to reflect upon in light of the all the aforementioned:

A. W. Tozer: “It is doubtful God can bless any man greatly until He has hurt him deeply.”

Alan Redpath: “When God wants to do an impossible task he takes an impossible man and crushes him.”

HT: Abide In Christ

In light of the above:

“…your poverty is no hindrance, for my Master asks nothing from you – the poorer the wretch, the more welcome to Christ. My Master is no covetous priest, who demands pay for what he does – he forgives us freely; he wants none of your merits, nothing whatever from you; come as you are to him, for he is willing to receive you as you are. But here is my sorrow and complaint, that this blessed Lord Jesus, though present to heal, receives no attention from the most of men. They are looking another way, and have no eyes for him…. My Master is not wrathful with you who forget him and neglect him, but he pities you from his heart. I am but his poor servant, but I pity, from my inmost; heart, those of you who live without Christ. I could fain weep for you who are trying other ways of salvation, for they will all end in disappointment, and if continued in, will prove to be your eternal destruction.” -Charles Spurgeon

HT:“Did I Stutter?”

Climbing the stairway to heaven…

I have been impressed by the Mormons I have met over the years. All have been extraordinarily kind, moral, and very compassionate people, perhaps more so than most. I have rarely heard a Mormon complain or speak ill of others. I have to say the Mormon system produces nice, moral people who love their families. If you want to use that subjective metric of a ‘changed life’, strong, family-friendly morals, and evangelical zeal as a measure of a religions validity, Mormonism would have to be a strong contender in the marketplace.

I have had members of local churches come to my door to evangelize, I have also had JWs comb the neighborhood to proselytize, and just recently, Mormons stopped by to witness to me just after my son and I finished reading from the gospel of Matthew. The two young men politely introduced themselves as Elder this and Elder that, I do not remember their names. They were dressed in the typical Mormon witness gear of dark slacks and white button-up shirts. They politely asked me if I wanted to be a humble follower of Jesus. During the course of the conversation, I answered that I was a Christian whose sins were forgiven, that I was covered by Christ’s righteousness and that Christ bore the penalty of my sins on the cross, that my faith was in a risen Saviour. Cutting to the chase, they kept pointing me to Joseph Smith. In their vocal affirmation that Christ is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, they also asserted that Christ had prophets in the Old Testament and the equivalent in the apostles of the New Testament and that Joseph Smith is also a prophet. To be an obedient and humble servant of Christ, I am to follow the teachings of Joseph Smith. I politely and firmly explained the Christ is the summing up of the Old and New Testament, that the Old Testament points to Him, that the New Testament reveals Him as the Word, as God incarnate. It is all about Christ and the atoning work of the Cross in time and space, in history, about repenting and believing in Christ alone for the forgiveness of sin.

I remember being shown a video a few months ago on the old GodTube thing where two Mormons were essentially given an arrogant ‘Gospel’ beat-down by one they sought to convert. Now, I do not abide false teachers, but these are young men at my door were not in a Protestant pulpit. They are in a different category than Joel Osteen and TBN. They were engaging the public marketplace of ideas with good intentions; they do not claim, I think, as belonging to an honestly rather bizarre, polytheistic nineteenth century restorationist movement, much in the way of commonality with orthodox Christianity. I think, though, they cared for me enough to witness to me. They are, however, inculcated into a system that is essentially, at its core, just like every other belief system in the world. You have to climb the ladder to your god, and in the case of Bible-based false religions, their faux Jesus just makes it a bit easier by helping us climb that staircase to glory. These witnesses for Joseph Smith, they needed to be witnessed to; they needed the Gospel presented clearly. I hope and I did that for them in a clear and concise way with the humility with which they approached me. They left when I would not bend to Joseph Smith, when their carefully scripted presentation could not follow, but I hope they understand the Gospel a bit better. In retrospect, I wish I had been more clear in using the Law to convict prior to sharing the Gospel.

I remember stumbling across a Mormon blog once wherein the question was posed if Mormons were more righteous than those in other religions. That is a very sad question. The predominate answer in comment section was, not suprisingly, yes. You see, my righteousness is not my own because I have none of my own. Christ’s righteousness is counted to me.

Good post from Pyromaniacs

I wanted to share this post by Dan Phillips:

Promises, promises

by Dan Phillips

Reading through Mark last week, Peter’s words arrested me: ὁ δὲ ἐκπερισσῶς ἐλάλει· ἐὰν δέῃ με συναποθανεῖν σοι, οὐ μή σε ἀπαρνήσομαι (Mark 14:31a).

Got that? Great! Let’s close in prayer….

No seriously; let me tell you how and why this verse caught hold of me.

Peter spoke this during the last supper the apostles shared before Jesus’ crucifixion. Jesus had just dropped the bombshell that every one of them would fall away from Him (Mark 14:27).

Peter, the Mouth that Roared, immediately leaps up to say, “Even though they all fall away, I will not” (Mark 14:29). Peter phrases it in such a way that indicates that it is perfectly conceivable to him that those other losers might bail. “But not I,” he says tersely and emphatically — strong adversative (ἀλλ᾽) and no verb.

In response, Jesus agrees with Peter — sort of. Peter is right that he will indeed do differently from the others. But not the way Peter insists. Jesus tells Peter that he alone — Peter — would deny Him three times (v. 30).

Bringing us to Peter’s retort given above, for which I’d offer this ad hoc translation: “But he very vehemently kept insisting, ‘Even should it be necessary for me to die with You, I absolutely will not deny You!’”

Greekers will note the double-negative — a (pardon me) no-no in English, but in Greek a doubly-emphatic negation. Peter is saying that there is no way he will deny Jesus: “Not! Not!”

We all know the sequel, Peter’s miserable failure and his heartbroken weeping.

Now, I don’t for a moment doubt Peter’s sincerity. Do you? Nor do I question the depth of feeling behind his words, nor the intensity of his intention and full expectation to fulfill them. Peter meant every word he said. Yet he failed. He could not deliver on his promises.

How did the Rock crumble? Where did Peter go wrong? In many ways, actually.

Mostly, Peter’s estimations were all off. He did not put a high enough estimation on Jesus’ words. He badly underestimated the fierceness of Satan’s coming attack, and the intensity of the temptation he’d face.

On the other hand, Peter seriously overestimated his own strength of character and will, his resolve, his ability to withstand temptation in his own strength. So when the trial came, the pressure soared and Peter came up short — far, far short.

Now, turn from this to Hebrews 13:5, which I render thus: “Your way of life must be without love of money, being content with what is at hand; for He Himself has said, ‘I absolutely will not abandon you, nor will I ever, ever desert you.’”

Another promise. Another emphatic promise — indeed, a very emphatic promise. The Greek student will count no less than five negatives in the last nine words: “Not, not will I abandon you, neither not not will I desert you.” It is, I have heard, the inspiration for the hymn’s wonderful words,

The soul that on Jesus has leaned for repose
I will not, I will not desert to its foes.
That soul, though all Hell should endeavor to shake,
I’ll never, no never, no never forsake.
“Another promise,” you say. “Like Peter’s.” Yes; when I read Peter’s double-negative, I thought of this quintuple-negative.

But consider the differences. When God makes this promise, is there any chance, any possibility whatever, that His estimations will be off? Is it possible that God did not know how difficult you would be, elect soul? Did He not know about your weakness, believer in Christ? Your flaws, your follies, your defects?

Did He not know of the difficult life you’d have — what kind of a spouse that person you dated would turn out to be? How your job would go? What would happen to your income, your neighborhood, your church, your health?

Is it possible that God overestimated the power of His grace to be sufficient for you? That He thought too highly of His ability to keep you, and control every last one of your circumstances (personal and impersonal; Psalm 115:3; Proverbs 21:1; Romans 8:28; Ephesians 1:11)?

If you have the false god of “open theism,” yes, I suppose all of those things (and much worse) are possible.

But if you have the almighty God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ for your God, then no. His promises are better than the best solid gold.

You can bank everything on them.

Postscript: This truth is of great personal value. I had just written these words when one with a broken heart came to see me, weeping because of a faithless, treacherous person who had callously betrayed him (and many others) for love of a sin, and arrogant refusal to repent.

I had the opportunity sincerely to sympathize, and to share what a wonderful contrast such a person makes with God. Thank God that God never shifts, falters, flips, nor turns traitor. Thank God that “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved” stands good now and before the Throne, as surely as “I absolutely will not abandon you, nor will I ever, ever desert you.”

Thank God that God is God, and not man.

I Am Boycotting Your Boycott!!!

OK, I am, at least for now and after thought and prayer, rescinding my blogging  hiatus.  Here I go again…

I found our recently that some focus on the family kind of group sent out an email encouraging Christians not to buy Pepsi products because Pepsi supports gay rights.  All this is probably old news in some denominational circles. After giving this issue some time to percolate, here are some thoughts on Pepsi and boycotts.

• Do we need to come up with a WWJD (what would Jesus drink) bracelet? But that might lead people to abandon Pepsi for wine!!! Irony….

• Is there a list of approved beverages? Can someone point me to a sinless company from which to buy my sodas?

• Does the advancement of the Kingdom really come about due to boycotting the consumer products of the world?

• Related to the previous bullet point, so what if we get everyone to behave nicely and quit with all those outward expressions of sexual immorality. Do we do the world a favor by forcing the Law on them without also pointing them to Grace? I think Satan would be quite happy, quite satisfied, if the gay people quit being gay and the adulterers quit adulterating and the drunks quit drinking as long as they think they are being ‘righteous’ by their own efforts.

• I assert without ambiguity that marriage is to be between a man and a woman. I also declare abortion is wrong; it is a holocaust. So, our government condones and supports partial-birth abortions. It is easy, it is without cost, to refrain from drinking Pepsi and send them them emails explaining your moral outrage. Now, put your money where your mouth is. The United States of America collects taxes, some of which goes to funding legal partial-birth abortions. If you think the dyslexic sexuality (I wish I could remember who came up with that description) of gay people is bad, how much worse is infanticide? Quit paying your taxes and boycott a country that funds killing babies if you think boycotts are the way the Kingdom is grown. (I hear crickets chirping.) “But I have to pay taxes” you say. No you don’t. You will go to jail if you don’t. It will cost you and your family unlike switching from Pepsi to Coke and sending Pepsi a few emails. So, do your really think boycotts are the way to go out into the world with the Good News to the glory of the Triune God?

• Do you think gay people going to be redeemed by Christ and change their orientation due to your boycott?

• Are there non-gay people, even some Christians, working for Pepsi that may lose their job if your boycott actually takes a substantial toll on Pepsi’s income-earning potential?

• Does not these boycotts sound a bit like the tactics of Islam Lite? “Conform to our moral codes or suffer the consequences!!” “Say ‘Merry Christmas’ during the holidays or we will take our business elsewhere!!!” So, if people do change there behaviors and marketing practices due to your boycotts, does it really reflect a change of heart or is it more due to a desire not to lose your Christian dollars?

• Do boycotts really reflect the call to be salt, to be a light on a hill?

• That all being said, if you desire on some personal level to refrain from drinking Pepsi because of their politics, I think that is quite OK and honestly admirable. Many years ago, I decided not to buy Hitachi stereo equipment because they sold the Soviets equipment that made Soviet submarines more difficult to detect. As an aside, and if memory serves, the president of Hitachi later killed himself. I hope there was no cause and effect.

O Lord, hasten that day…

A prayer titled ‘Contentment’ found quoted at Challies:

Heavenly Father,

If I should suffer need, and go unclothed, and be in poverty,

make my heart prize thy love,

know it, be constrained by it,

though I be denied all blessings.

It is thy mercy to afflict and try me with wants,

for by these trials I see my sins, and desire severance from them.

Let me willingly accept misery, sorrows, temptations,

if I can thereby feel sin as the greatest evil,

and be delivered from it with gratitude to thee,

acknowledging this as the highest testimony of thy love.

When thy Son, Jesus, came into my soul instead of sin

he became more dear to me than sin had formerly been;

his kindly rule replaced sin’s tyranny.

Teach me to believe that if ever I would have any sin subdued

I must not only labour to overcome it,

but must invite Christ to abide in the place of it,

and he must become to me more than vile lust had been;

that his sweetness, power, life may be there.

Thus I must seek a grace from him contrary to sin,

but must not claim it apart from himself.

When I am afraid of evils to come,

comfort me by showing me that in myself

I am a dying, condemned wretch,

but in Christ I am reconciled and live;

that in myself I find insufficiency and no rest,

but in Christ there is satisfaction and peace;

that in myself I am feeble and unable to do good,

but in Christ I have ability to do all things.

Though now I have his graces in part,

I shall shortly have them perfectly in that state

where thou wilt show thyself fully reconciled,

and alone sufficient, efficient,

loving me completely, with sin abolished.

O Lord, hasten that day.

Sovereign over many troubles

Psalm71:20(ESV)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              You who have made me see many troubles and calamities will revive me again; from the depths of the earth you will bring me up again.

In my reading this morning, I came across the aforementioned verse and found solace in the reaffirmation of God’s sovereignty over the created order, over circumstances, even difficult ones.  Events are not now, nor ever have been, or ever will be beyond His reach, His hand.  Things just do not happen to his elect as if we are caught up in some harsh machinery of cause and effect, of random, uncontrolled forces.  Here in this Psalm we find a reminder that His loving  and sovereign hand has always upon His children even before we were able to affirm such, even in troubles and calamities, all for our good and His glory.