Extemporaneous Ramblings

Well, another year is drawing to a close, and the media et al are full of the usual end of year special reports: What happenned, who happenned, where it happenned, etc., etc.

I just don’t get it. Actually I never really got it. All this hoopla about the end of the year has always left me cold. Not to mention the eternal boredom of the media end of year excess.

If one were celebrating something of a real milestone, I suspect that I might see the point, but the end of the calendar year has no real significance in the life of anyone, except maybe the income tax department.

Renewal has nothing to do with the flip of a calendar page, any more that the tick of your watch is in any way transformational in and of itself.

Renewal is singularly and only related to ones place in the Kingdom, and what each new day (irrespective of the the time of year) brings in that saga. The calendar is unrelated to that as far as I can see.
So for the new years party (lower case you will note) I just have to say yawn.

On the other hand, maybe I am missing the point massively. If so, someone please ’splain it to me asap…

Those of you who have checked in the last day or so may have noticed that the blog has been bereft of new posts. True enough, but I have not been idle! I have been writing in a different way, appropriate the Topic area of this post.

I have writing using the medium as opposed to the message, researching and implementing extensions (functional nuances) to the blog presentation form. Some are fairly obvious (sidebar RSS news headline feeds from OldTruth.org, Southern Baptist News, and Slashdot.org, neat new real time Global Site Map and Last Article in each Topic area under Site Information, menu refinements, and such) and some are more behind the scenes. A couple more are still in the works. Some worked well and stayed, while others didn’t fit and were not kept.

It is indeed (again back to Mr M) another type of ’statement’, not to mention fun in an obsessive way.

Nonetheless, I hope that you find the enhancements useful and enjoyable, or least not annoying. Back to real posting shortly I hope.

This Post could also have been titled “I don’t do Windows!”.

Computer professionals (especially those on the technical side of the business) have something in common with doctors, central bankers, and a number of other professions. What they have in common is that many people who they meet from outside their vocation will have an uncontrollable desire to present their personal problems related to the other person’s vocation for solution, convinced that solving their problems for them is a privilege in any setting. Moreover, they feel that working on their behalf for free should be your privilege.

In the case of IT people this manifests in a senario such as: You are introduced to someone in a social setting, and they learn in the course of things that you are an IT technical person. They then seem compulsively driven to share with you the latest problem with their Windows Operating System. The problem is presented with the zeal of someone who believes that you have no other desire but to share you professional skill with them without limit, on the spot, and who thinks all IT people are experts in the Windows Desktop.

Further, once they know this about you, all subsequent meetings will be overtaken by further requests for assistance, or lengthy descriptions of one problem or another.

Lawrence Greenspan, the past Governor of the US Central Bank (arguably the most powerful man in the US), once said that, after having been acosted at social gatherings endlessly with financial questions once people learned what he did for a living, he was subsquently going to tell people that he was a Florist, in hopes that they didn’t need a floral arrangement as much as they needed financial advice.

In the discussions that are being described there is no room for you, the person. There is really no discussion or fellowship at all. The only thing on the front burner is the other person’s problem or information. They will tenaciously resist any diversion in the interaction. You don’t really exist in the equation as a person. Why would anyone seek out this sort of interaction? Most of us would not.

We are usually too polite to state the truth - If we want to work we will go to the office!

If you counter that you don’t know much about that particular system, you are as often as not relegated to the incompetency pile for not providing free consulting advice. That you might have a life, and want to actually discuss something more meaningful than work, is beyond comprehension of the self-absorbed.

One fellow I knew at a church would acost me every Sunday after service, to ’share’ with me his latest Windows exploits or problems. Talk about spoiling the moment. To say I took to avoiding him would be polite.

Now, all this is not to say that there are not areas of IT that I might be experimenting with and interested in chatting about, but that is a completely different senario. It also does not mean that in some instances I do not happily provide IT support. Again, different.
In the final analysis it is sad, and it is a situation we should all bear in mind when chatting with those in other areas of endevour. They might like to actually converse about life!

On the other hand, “I am a Florist” sounds like a good approach to me. Thank you Mr. Greenspan.

John Calvin and John Wesley, of course!

Continuing on Spiritual Warfare, let us now turn to responsibility and consequences. With the outworking of life as a reflection of that warfare, and active actualization of the battle between principalities and saints, where does personal outcomes as a result of individual actions fit in?

The Reformed premise of saving grace is that it is not of us: ” For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God” Ephesians 2:8 (NASB). We can not save ourselves, even a little bit, so what implication does this have in living in the world after He has called us to Himself?

We have already seen that we are actively involved in the divine struggle. Looking at the principalities involved, and our human affinity for the world of Natural Man, if we do not subscribe to the Perserverance of the Saints (the P in TULIP), we are in big trouble indeed.

Those who know that salvation is not of ourselves, but of the Lord, also know from Scripture that “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand;” John 10:27-28 (NASB). Thus they can rest in the knowledge that in the ongoing battle they are safe in His arms for eternity, worldly outworking notwithstanding.

For those who take the Wesleyan view, and see a human role in salvation, and more importantly a human role in maintaining that state, there are big worries and loads of jepardy.

Since we are born to sin, and for all intents and purposes can not help ourselves in this regard, requiring His quickening in order to consider the promise of salvation other than foolishness, then even once we are His how could we maintain that state if any of the responsibility was ours? Clearly we could not, and we would be in constant danger if the end should approach at the wrong moment.

Thankfully, it is all of Him alone (Solus Christus), through His Grace alone (Sola Gracia). Since His will can not be thwarted, we as believers shall perserver into Glory.

Now, does the fact that the Wesleyan does not believe this mean that he, once saved, is in any actual jepardy? An interesting question.

And assuming that there is a fight to be undertaken through our participation, how do we as believers proceed?

Scripture states that the real struggling that is occuring as life plays out is one of Spiritual Warfare. The events of this world occur in the context of this battle playing out. The secular world writes this off as foolishness, as we would expect, since our Lord has said ” But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him” 1 Corinthians 2:14 (NASB). We expect this from the world. But what about the body of believers on this matter?

It should be different. Again, from Scripture “But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one. For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ.” 1 Corinthians 2:15-16 (NASB). So the those in the Body are to appraise things spiritually and thereby stand with the Lord.

When it comes to major, obviously evil events, Christians in general (even nominal adherents) will usual make reference to evil in the world. Even then, however, it usually never goes beyond a casual reference in most instances. They do not see the “Prince of the Power of the air” Ephesians 2:2 (NASB) as the active agent in the world.
What about day to day life? The scripture passage at the beginning of this post does not differential between large events and small, nor one circumstance or another. It simply states that the struggle on earth is one of spiritual warfare more than just circumstance.

Looking back to the world in biblical times, this particular reality was seen quite a bit more clearly. Althiough there were complications due to the their lack of understanding of some nature phenomena, their conceptual acceptance and grasp of the individual participation in and the effects of spiritual warfare in daily life were clearer.

This is not to say that the Christian community has not swung to the other side of the pendulum at times (for example, the dark events of the Puritan era, despite their brilliance in other theological areas). However, even there, the core concept of warfare involving principalities beyond the natural actualizing in daily life was more accurate to them than that which we see today within the Christian community.

It is as if the Christian community tries to trumpet the reality of the Kingdom, while at the same time applying postmodern philosophy to the event of daily life, assuming that these world views are compatible or complimentary. They simply do not combine. They do not intersect.

So how do we see this within life in the world?

Why theology?

First it is a primary interest. I want to explore certain issues that related mostly to Reformed Theology and it’s presentation (or not) within the church. Since this related more to the theology itself, it seems to fit in a separate thread from the Life in the Body or How then shall we live, which are more situationally specific.

Why lite?

Well, because in the theology area I am not a heavy hitter. If you need a more academic and recognized treatment, then a visit to Real Clear Theology with Eric Svendsen or In the Beginning with William Ramey is in order. I certainly do not hold the credentials to claim to be authoritative on, nor have an academically exhaustive knowledge of the issues at hand.

Nonetheless, I feel called to explore and writing on these issues as they present themselves.

So fasten your seat belts please…

And so another Christmas comes upon us. In a sermon last week, the preacher posited that Christmas should by biblical definition be more contemplative, with the model of this being Mary as she “treasured all these things, pondering them in her heart.” Luke 2:19 (NASB).

He suggested that in the hustle and bustle of this time we find even a brief time to ponder the reality of these events of 2000 years ago. To carry this further, let me go further and add that these events surely shape our lives more that anything that might occur in the false immediacy of the present moment. Nothing is more important than the reality that we are His and that that is so only because He made it possible, through “the kind intention of his will” Ephesians 1:5 (NASB).

We must never forget this and all that it implies!

Please also see our Christmas 2006 page.

Most jugglers that I have known have a perfectionistic streak. Yet in juggling, dropping the pattern and making errors is reality. What goes up eventually comes down. This would seem to be a recipy for frustration, and one non-juggler that I know commented exactly that to me recently.

In reality, it is exactly the opposite. Errors and dropping are very important. If you aren’t ever dropping, you aren’t trying anything new and you aren’t learning.

The joy includes the miss-steps. The joy is the process as well as the accomplishment - in fact more than the accomplishment many times This is even more true when working as a group. In the collaboration there is a resolution of the errors in a new way, and the development of a spirit of tolerance as the jugglers push forward together. The only requirement is honest effort and application.

Does that mean that there is no over frustration at times, even impatience? Of course not. We are people working together. But even that is in support of the effort, whether that is expressed or not.

Looking at this, there are strong parallels in the juggling work and the Christian life, to be explored as I go along…

In the Life in the Body thread I talk about the need for play and joy for all people, all ages. One place a find that joy is in juggling. Sounds silly, right? Well that is exactly the point. Juggling is a wonderful, often difficult, occasionally frustrating, but always joyous activity.

One tends to see juggling as a solitary passtime. Although in terms of basic skill acquisition and component practice that is often true, the activity itself is most enjoyed in the collaborative framework of a juggling group.

Jugglers share skills and fellowship, but mostly there is a shared joy in the activity that can not easily be described.

The theme from a well know hymn, and a clear message in countless Scripture passages, regardless of the circumstances. Again in Psalm 40:16 we have “rejoice and be glad…”

But as I noted in Confusion of Focus, we often don’t. We are mired in worldly circumstance, at times even including the circumstances of relationship with other believers.

What have we forgotten in our haste to make things work as we assume they should?

We have forgotten who is in charge, of course. As Christmas approaches and we are confronted by the Lord of all creation, fullfilling the promise of a redemptive paradigm, let us dwell on the implications of that act.

Everything is (note the active voice) created by Him, and in His mercy He is redeeming in the world according to His will. All the capital H’s are important.

The elect have reason to celebrate for His hand is permanently upon them. The world has reason to celebrate since His common grace permits the dynamics of creation to continue from moment to moment. Without the dynamics of that act in the present moment, neither would continue.

In this there is joy. We see it in our play (and playing is important for everyone at every age) as we loose ourselves in what He has endowed us with. Let us carry that joy into all of our lives and rejoice…

Let’s talk about gifts, spiritual gifts that is, and the ownership thereof…

Scripture makes it clear that all gifts are from the Lord and that activities using those gifts within the body of believers are appointments from the Lord (1 Cor 12:27-29). As a Calvinist, for whom Tulip is not just the name of a flower, I believe that there is no coincidental placement within the body of believers.

Where it gets interesting is how the use of ‘gifts’ is applied to believers within congregations, and the differentiation (or not) between secular vocational skills and ‘gifts’. Many church bodies, having a determined mandate centered pragmatically on church operation and growth, tend to view the vocational skills or talents of congregants as their gifts, to be utilized in add of the church. Very convenient, a little too convenient me thinks. This seems particularly prevalent within the church growth movement for obvious reasons.

Vocational skills and secular success may have little or nothing to do with an individual’s real spiritual gifts or calling. They can at times be at odds with it. At best, the appropriate application of the gifts may be only tangential to their secular application, related in that they happen use the same base talent set.

What that means in practice is that demonstrated competence in a secular area (though at times it may seguay into church service) is NOT an appropriate starting point for guiding a congregant to their productive and best ‘calling’ in the body of Christ. This is the exact opposite the approach most often taken and is made worse by the use of conventional talent or gift questionnaires.

Sadly, use of the obvious and too convenient secular skills is all to often the area of church work that a congregant is pressured into because of local need. That local need has nothing to do with that person’s true calling, and to the degree that this is true represents an abuse of that person’s placement in that body. It may be well intentioned in the larger sense, but it is nonetheless inexcusable.

Where am I going here? Well, the ‘church’ has to learn that a person will only find the place to which they have been ‘called’ when encourage to explore what the calling is, not to fill a need in that particular organization.

We must guard against asking people to fill a need, other than in an emergency and then only very temporarily, unless they feel called to it, irregardless of the convenience of their skills.

My recent experiences led me to recall an interesting ecclesiastical puzzle that a friend brought up some time ago and that I have observed several times in congregations.

Case 1: The Pastor of a protestant church (I have no Catholic experience to offer) announces that he has been ‘called’ to a new church and will leave shortly.

Although people may be sad and regret the situation (or not in some cases), they do not question for a moment that the ‘call’ is devine. He is wished well and sent off into the sunset as an obedient servant.

Case 2: Same senario except that this time a congregant member of a protestant church announces that he doesn’t fit at the church for one reason or another, and is moving to or looking for a new church.

In this case, the congregant is more often than not told that he or she has been placed in that congregation by the Lord for a reason and shouldn’t ‘run away’ from problems. His or her reason is assumed to be a man-centered one and certainly not devine in origination. If they do leave, the well wishes are often grudgeing, possibly judgemental and assume that the congregant has the problem.

So, what is wrong with these pictures?

In many (I won’t go so far as to say most) instances, the pastor in Case 1 was less than happy with the current church or he wouldn’t have bothered with the new offer. The legitimacy of that unhappiness is not relevant to our discussion here. The new ‘call’ may legitimately be a better devine utilization of pastoral gifts. It may also be just a more comfortable fit for the person. In either case, no fault is attributed.

The situation in Case 2, however, present a problem. Why can a Pastor feel a calling to a new situation (even one that suits better) and it is okay, even a blessing for all, while the same move by a congregant is treated as man-centered and a problem in the congregant?

It just doesn’t wash, folks.

Is the Pastor intrisically closer to the Lord? I don’t buy it as universal. Is the congregant intrinsically farther from the Lord? Again, makes no sense.

If the congregant should be working through whatever the issues are, then the pastor should be doing no less. If the pastor can hear a new and exciting call, then the congregant can do likewise and should have equal blessing. The congregant and Pastor should be regarded with unanimity.

Now, that doesn’t mean that there is not a clear time to go, or to stay. That is alway between the believer and the Lord. The problem illuminated here is the use of man-centered values and reasons to treat two situation differently.

Just something to ponder…

A good friend, who follows my blogging drivel, dropped me an email this morning that got me to thinking (yes, I know that is a shocking revelation). He commented that a certain situation that he was aware of was, in his words, “figuring in your rants”.

He was correct, but what it made me think about was the percentage of negative ranting vs positive ranting in the blog - not only my blog, but others as well.

Yes, this stuff needs to be said, and yes, often is strikes a common cord with many others. But like media in general, we are often soooooo negative in focus. There are lots of good things, honest there is. It is certainly cathartic to rant righteously, but we also need to rant about that good stuff as well.

Christians have eternal reason to rant positively. And so we are back to my “How shall we live?” thread.

I don’t have an answer, but maybe just bearing it in mind will be a step on the road…

As we race towards Christmas, I was thinking about the sheperds, minding their flocks and their own business in the field, confronted by the Angelic Host of the Lord. They were afraid but they caught on. We too would be afraid, but how quickly would we catch on?

Sure, with our current Bible knowledge, if the Heavenly Host directly confronted us, we would hopefully figure it out pretty quickly. But what about the more subtle circumstances of everyday life. As we bustle about, faced by the Lord in our hearts at every turn, how often do we ‘get it’? How often do we live in simple faith, accepting that what we may have constructed or planned simply isn’t what the Lord had in mind, and that it is okay? More than okay, it is perfect and good.

Those plain, common, at the time crude, sheperds had something to say to us about falling on our faces before the path of the Lord and what he brings into our lives. Sometimes, many times, it seems so hard to keep that simple fact in mind.

How then shall we live?

Most readers have probably heard of weekend warrior syndrome. That is when people (mostly guys one might speculate) who are largely sedentary and out of shape go out and do vigorous activity or contact sports, resulting is physical stress injuries of one sort or another.

Well, dogs are not immune. Last night, while playing with his buddy in a local yard, my dog caught his for in a wood lattice work while jumping around, and came up badly lame.

So, after a night in the living room with him, since he couldn’t climb the stair (yes, he is 85 pounds of spoiled Doberman), we were off to the vet this morning.

Now, if YOU had this injury in our fair Canadian city, you would languish in the emergency department for 4-10 hours waiting to be looked at. If would be free, but only if your time and pain are worth nothing.

The dog was seen by his first class doctor the next morning. We waited about 15 minutes. He received a more thorough exam than you would ever get at the emergency department. His treatment not only included conventional means, but also up-to-date naturopathic therapy that is used by Olympic atheletes.

Yes, it cost a few bucks, but if you were to work out the cost vs the time, it would be cheap at twice the price if you could get that level of treatment.

Now, I am not saying the medicare is bad, or that a completely private medical system is desireable. It isn’t. But there is something fundamentally wrong with our care system, which for all intents and purposes burns while the governments fiddle.