Faith Looks at the Bridge, Not the Chasm

When it comes right down to it, how do we end up trusting--really trusting--in Jesus when the going gets rough? This is a question of true faith. T. David Gordon recounts a story that may open our eyes to the answer. In his wonderful little book, Why Johnny Can't Preach, Gordon is dealing with the need for us preachers to be sure that we don't just challenge people to have faith, or tell them ways to be more moral (which turns the focus inward to self), or by "taking potshots at what is wrong with our culture." Rather, as he says, "faith is built by careful, thorough exposition of the person, character, and work of Christ."

A Very Helpful Letter After the Civil War

About 25 years after the Civil War, the Southern Presbyterian, Robert Lewis Dabney moved from Virginia to Austin, Texas. "In his latter years he became blind and weak, and knew his death was near. He wrote to his old friend [Clement Read] Vaughn, wondering whether he would have strong enough faith to face his impending death, and Vaughn's reply was as theologically trenchant as it was pastorally lovely. He wrote back to Dabney and asked Dabney what a traveler would do if he came to a chasm over which a bridge was spanned":

What does he do to breed confidence in the bridge? He looks at the bridge; he gets down and examines it. He don't [sic] stand at the bridge-head and turn his thoughts curiously in on his own mind to see if he has confidence in the bridge. If his examination of the bridge gives him a certain amount of confidence, and yet he wants more, how does he make his faith grow? Why, in the same way; he still continues to examine the bridge. Now, my dear old man, let your faith take care of itself for awhile, and you just think of what you are allowed to trust in. Think of the Master's power, think of his love; think how he is interested in the soul that searches for him, and will not be comforted until he finds him. Think of what he has done, his work. That blood of his is mightier than all the sins of all the sinners that ever lived. Don't you think it will master yours?

Now, dear old friend, I have done to you just what I would want you to do to me if I were lying in your place. The great theologian, after all, is just like any other one of God's children, and the simple gospel talked to him is just as essential to his comfort as it is to a milk-maid or to a plow-boy. May God give you grace, not to lay too much stress on your faith, but to grasp the great ground of confidence, Christ, and all his work and all his personal fitness to be a sinner's refuge. Faith is only an eye to see him. I have been praying that God would quiet your pains as you advance, and enable you to see the gladness of the gospel at every step. Good-bye. God be with you as he will. Think of the Bridge!

Your brother,

C. R. V.

"MUNDANENESS" Is Ruining the Ministry & Churches

Why? Because the habits of our culture have promoted the banal and encouraged the trivial. As a result, it is nigh on to impossible for many ministers today to think deeply about the text of Scripture. If they cannot think deeply then they'll not be able to preach deeply either. Listen to what T. David Gordon says about this in his very important recent book, Why Johnny Can't Preach: The Media Have Shaped the Messengers--

Our inability to read texts [he means to ponder deeply the implications therein] is a direct result of the presence of electronic media. The sheer pace of an electronic media-dominated culture is entirely too fast. . . . We become acclimated to distraction, to multitasking, to giving part of our attention to many things at once, while almost never devoting the entire attention of the entire soul to anything. The close reading of texts would be an antidote to such a pace because such reading is time-consuming and requires the concentration of the entire person. . . .

When the poet stares at that which the rest of us merely glance at, he invites us to take a longer look along with him. It is precisely this longer look that is necessary to cultivate a sensibility for the significant.

Here, the shift of dominant cultural media has been profound, because television, in contrast to poetry, is essentially trivial. Because its pictures must move (and indeed, even camera angles must move, on average less than every three seconds), it captures best those things that are kinetic, that have motion. Yet few of the more significant aspects of life involve much motion: love, humility, faith, repentance, prayer, friendship, worship, affection, fear, hope, self-control. Most of what is significant about life takes place between the ears, as we make sense of life, of our place in it, and of our failures and successes, our joys, our sorrows, our fears, our loves. This world of the mind and soul is essentially a linguistic world, a nonkinetic world; a different world from the world of rapidly changing images.

I think Gordon was right when he offered that "Mundaneness is . . . part of the curse of Genesis 3." We have to fight the pull of culture through self-discipline, the discipline to rule out those influences which war against our soul, which demean the profound, which even prejudice our hearts and minds against anything deep and most beneficial. Faster is not better in most areas of life.

Look tomorrow for what Gordon says would make a difference?

C. S. Lewis--The Decline of Religion is a Good Thing!

In the mid-1940s, there was a cry that religion was in decline. But was this such a bad thing? C. S. Lewis in his essay in God in the Dock, entitled, "The Decline of Religion," points out that if the kind of religion that sported large numbers was forced upon the populace, then it would be hard to tell who was there because they really wanted God. An example he cites was the requisite chapel attendance at Oxford around 1900, which by 1946 had shrunk, as it turns out, at "the precise moment when chapel ceased to be compulsory." This was typical all over England, he claims. This change, he further claims, has been taken to indicate that the nation as a whole has "passed from a Christian to a secular outlook." But he points out that if one were to derive any clue from the novels of the late 19th century, one would discover that they were as secular then as during the mid-1900's.

Again--Is This A Bad Thing?

Lewis would say, "No." Why? As he said,

". . . The religion which has declined was not Christianity. It was a vague Theism with a strong and virile ethical code, which, far from standing over against the 'World', was absorbed into the whole fabric of English institutions and sentiment and therefore demanded church-going as (at best) a part of loyalty and good manners as (at worst) a proof of respectability. Hence a social pressure, like the withdrawal of the compulsion, did not create a new situation. The new freedom first allowed accurate observation to be made. When no man goes to church except because he seeks Christ the number of actual believers can at last be discovered. . . . The decline of 'religion', thus understood, seems to me in some ways was a blessing. At the very worst it makes the issue clear. . . . When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or Mordred: middle things are gone (emphases mine).

Thus, false believers were no longer forced to hide beneath a cloak of conformity. Their true colors were allowed to show. Legalistic churches still do this in mass numbers, allowing people to pay lip-service to God while denying the very heart which he requires of all true followers! That needs to be exposed and repented of in the church.

It is not so good for the world. As Lewis avers, there is a sense in which such a decline is worse for the 'World', in that religion tends in some degree to purify a country, aids in the "comparative humanity of her police, and the possibility of some mutual respect and kindness between political opponents." But, as he adds, "I am not clear that it makes conversions to Christianity rarer or more difficult: rather the reverse. It makes the choice more unescapable."

Conquering The Church's Reductionistic Faith

I am pondering true love for God. It seems a rare thing even among Christians. Bring up some feelings for God and people sort of lose interest. Now, it were one thing if it were done in a weird or obnoxious way. But one can be careful and introduce the topic slowly, thoughtfully within normal Christian conversation. It still seems love for God has been edged out (or kicked out) by religious and even not so religious solutions to man’s problems. To find someone who’d bless our soul with sweet recollections of Jesus’ love would be a FIND! And I must hasten to add that though writing this, I myself may not leave another believer feeling it either. It is possible to identify a problem and still not evince the solution. My wife and I talk about these matters. So much talk is about God, around religion, involving church. Yet, it seems to circumnavigate the Person. It’s reductionistic in nature. And it is the “air” we breathe. Do we fight it? Is that to be our modus operandi? Yet, we must believe that seeing it is part way to resolving the problem.

Enter Deuteronomy 29:4 . . .

This blew my away this morning. Let me give the context with the preceding two verses:

2 And Moses summoned all Israel and said to them: “You have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh and to all his servants and to all his land, 3 the great trials that your eyes saw, the signs, and those great wonders.

Moses reminds them of God’s powerful grace exhibited toward them. These are the historical record of God’s dealings with man, and they deserve recognition. More, they demand worship! He is grounding their being, their existence, yes, even their future prospects as the holy people of God (abundant life), in the certainty of God’s previous and clear mercies. In short, there is very good reason to trust God, to adore God! Saying that does not accomplish it, as we know.

Next, and here is an astonishing statement:

4 But to this day the Lord has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear.

It’s as if He were saying, “You have the history, the evidence and it’s etched in your memory. It is documented as a legacy, passed down orally as well as in written form! But, so far you do not have the accompanying and necessary heart to rightly understand and appreciate that history.”

So, it’s one thing to read what God has done, quite another to relate to it. Question is, does God always give this kind of heart to his creatures? Are we not commanded to hear and understand? Forty years had passed as they wandered through the desert, the older and generally faithless generation dying off in the process due to their unbelief. Still, even those remaining and left to hear Moses’ sermons in preparation to enter the promised land, even they had not been given a “heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear.” They had something to be sure! They evidently believed more than their forbears; they were allowed to live and enter the land!

So, what is the meaning of this “heart” and “eyes” and “ears?” And are we all waiting on God to give us these? Is there anything we can do to promote such a knowledge? Does the New Testament unveil a new way? If so, why is it still that seemingly so few enjoy such an "interior" life? Oh, let us ask these questions. It is THIS kind of knowledge to which Jesus as referring in salvation: "This is eternal life that they KNOW you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent" (John 17:3). Please, give us a "heart to understand, eyes to see, ears to hear."

Satan's M.O.

In this very rare book, which even C. H. Spurgeon could not put his hands on, the illustrative Puritan, Thomas Watson teaches how we may overcome the snare of the devil by the fear of God.

If Satan cannot take a Christian away from duty, he will put him too far in duty. Humiliation is a duty, but Satan suggests that the soul is not humble enough: and indeed he never thinks it humbled enough till it despairs. Satan comes thus to a man: "Your sins have been great, and your sorrow should be proportionable." But is it so? Can you say you have been as great a mourner as you have been a sinner? What is a drop of sorrow to a sea of sin? This is laid only as a snare--the subtle enemy would have a Christian weep himself blind, and in a desperate humour throw away the anchor of hope. And if Satan has such fallacies, and as a decoy draws away so many millions into his snares, is there not cause of jealous fear lest we should be trapped? The fear of God will make us fear hell's stratagems. Satan's snares are worse than his darts.

If "fear" is defined here with reference to God then it bespeaks a healthy respect to God's person, his power, and his purity. The "fear of God" next, leads us in our trials, in our decisions to determine how we shall act based on God. We start with God and "work outward" to applications that apply to us. Too often, even "Christians" begin with themselves and try to "add" God to their solutions, instead of figuring out how their issues fit into the plans of God. The "fear of God" thankfully, sets this right!

What Kind of Death Did They Die?

Three Well-Known Deaths

This past week, three celebrities died—Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcett, & Michael Jackson. They grabbed the headlines which is to be expected. As far as ability goes, each added to his own industry in unique ways which will never be forgotten by this generation . . . or beyond, I suspect. The tragedy multiplies infinitely IF they did not know Jesus Christ as their Savior. There seems no evidence that they professed such faith in Christ. So, again this is the real tragedy, not that a musician died, or that a ‘70's icon pass on or that an octogenarian late night side kick finally breathed his last. Oh, folks will make much of their accomplishments, gifts & talents and contributions to the glitz industry and to humor. They may even point to some redeeming quality about each which is (it seems) supposed to offset a completely God-denying life, but which nonetheless qualifies them for heaven!? This is a very common practice among those without hope, desperate to declare it for another. After all, "what is to become of us," they say, "when we die?" Understandable. Yet, salvation through Jesus is possible for them as well, but not via peer declaration. Question is: was that ever in their sights? I hope that it was. I fear that it was not.

One Unknown

Here in upstate New York, near the NY thruway on route 19 another man died this past week, an 84 year old retired minister. He, contrary to the previous three, is not well known. He earned a pastor’s salary commensurate with a rural community, and did not even have a retirement fund to carry him into his last years. Back in those days, that wasn’t uncommon. Rather he had to work to keep up his subsistence laboring in the field of electricity, and pastoring a small body of believers in the town of Stafford, NY. He died probably from a diabetes reaction which caused him to swerve into oncoming traffic, killing both himself and a 62 year old gentleman. He wasn’t that well known except around here. But he WAS well known to God. Ray Sissel was a lovely man, gentle, an avid hunter and fisherman, affable in every way. We mourn his home going, but not his entrance into glory!! Oh, no. THAT we celebrate, as does he! But be sure of this, Ray did not enter into glory because he was a pastor; he pastored because that glory was too dear to keep to himself! God, through Christ, saves those who cry out to him. He further transforms them and puts his Holy Spirit into their hearts filling them with comfort and strength and joy! Truly, “Precious in his sight is the death of one of his saints” (Psalm 116:15). Precious indeed. We look forward to the day when we shall see Ray Sissel again. But more importantly, we anticipate walking with Jesus. Ah, that will be glory!

It is not how MANY mourn your loss, but WHO WELCOMES YOUR DEATH! Ray is looking at Jesus NOW. I'll take that! Praise God, all who cry out to God may have such hope. "For the Son of Man [Jesus] has come to seek and to save those who are lost" (Luke 19:10).

Integrity Destroys Corruption

Think about it, much corruption issues from those who can be "bought" for a price. Their standards--such as they are--can be set aside IF money is to be gained. Remove that and on what could tyrants depend? Spurgeon eloquently points this out in this afternoon's Morning & Evening Devotions:

Lose all rather than lose your integrity, and when all else is gone, still hold fast a clear conscience as the rarest jewel which can adorn the bosom of a mortal. Be not guided by the will-o’-the-wisp of policy, but by the pole-star of divine authority. Follow the right at all hazards. When you see no present advantage, walk by faith and not by sight. Do God the honour to trust him when it comes to matters of loss for the sake of principle. See whether he will be your debtor! See if he doth not even in this life prove his word that “Godliness, with contentment, is great gain,” and that they who “seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, shall have all these things added unto them.” Should it happen that, in the providence of God, you are a loser by conscience, you shall find that if the Lord pays you not back in the silver of earthly prosperity, he will discharge his promise in the gold of spiritual joy.

Here is a serious word for our day of convenience & compromise!