Too Busy

I'm constantly amazed by how much my role as a parent can illuminate my relationship with God.

This morning as I left for work, I peeked my head in my 2 year old daughter's room to say goodbye. After wishing her a great day, I asked if she would give me a hug.

"No, Daddy. I'm busy with this toy." She turned her head away and focused on the toy in her lap.

I was crushed. I told her goodbye and headed toward the door.

I was reminded of all the times I'm too busy with whatever I'm doing to spend a few minutes alone with God. How many times have I said the exact same thing to God: "No Daddy. I'm too busy with that project in the back yard." Or "No, Daddy. There's a really good TV show on in three minutes." I wonder if, in those times, God feels something like I felt this morning.

Although my daughter and I see each other throughout the day, and we interact and experience life together, it is the special moments (like my goodbye hug) that I really look forward to the most. I'm sure the same is true of our heavenly Father: Although He is with us throughout the day, and we experience our lives in His presence, it's the special moments (like our daily quiet time) where we really make a connection with Him. When I'm too busy to spend that time with Him, I bet it breaks His heart.

So I was feeling pretty low this morning. As I walked across the driveway to my car, I heard the front door open. It was my little girl.

"I'm sorry, Daddy." My heart leaped. I ran up to her and scooped her up in my arms. "I'm sorry for not giving you a hug, Daddy."

My broken heart was suddenly healed.

God, I'm sorry for skipping my quiet time with you last night (and so many other times). Please forgive me. I look forward to those times. Help me to remember that you look forward to them, too.

Understandings I'm Seeking

This is a post I’ve been meaning to write for a long time now, simply because it’s subject is really the reason this blog exists.  As I said in my newly-updated About This Blog post, this is where I put some of those thoughts about my faith (speaking very generally) that bounce around in my head, and just won’t go away.  It helps to have a place to organize my thoughts, and I can come back to a particular post if I forget where my thinking was on a particular topic.  Also, for those doubts or questions that don’t really have good answers, clicking that “Publish Post” button is like flushing the toilet. 

Several months ago, Cliff Martin over at Outside The Box (a blog that I used to read regularly) posted his list of Understandings I’m Seeking – A list of difficult issues he was interested in understanding better.  Ever since, I’ve kept a mental list of my own, to which I add as new issues become important to me, and subtract as I gain understanding on some issues.  

Lately, my “Understandings I’m Seeking” list has become stagnant.  The same issues have been at the top of the list for quite a while, which means that they have remained important to me, while simultaneously proving difficult to understand, at least for me.  It is for this reason I think it is time for my own “Understandings I’m Seeking” post.  

Understandings I’m Seeking 

1. The relationship between the teachings of Jesus and the Apostle Paul 

I'm seeking to understand how the teachings of Jesus are related to those of the Apostle Paul.  In particular, I want to understand why Jesus' teachings are so different from those of Paul, especially when it comes to the requirements for salvation.  

In my own Baptist tradition, the words of Jesus are constantly twisted to fit into a Paul-shaped mold, and to me, that just seems wrong.  I hope one might be able to assume that God-incarnate would be able to get it right!  But instead I constantly hear (in reference to Jesus' words) "Well.... You have to read that in light of ..."  - And then some passage from Romans or Hebrews.

I understand the desire to harmonize the Scriptures, and the belief that inspired Scripture must fit together.  But if God really did become man, and that man is Jesus Christ, than something is wrong.  I am seeking to understand what that is.

2. The second coming of Jesus and the New Testament expectation that it was immanent 

I’m seeking to better understand why the first Christians (and especially Jesus Himself) expected Jesus’ second coming to happen soon, as recorded in passages like Matt. 10:23, Matt. 16:27-28, Luke 21:5-36  1 Thess 4:14-15, Rev. 1:1, and many, many others.  This expectation is typically explained away by claiming that Jesus, when He said "this generation will not pass away" before He returns, did not mean "generation" but instead meant the nation of Israel or even the generation that is alive when Jesus returns. (How convenient!)  

I’m continually flabbergasted that the same people who insist on using the “plain reading” of Genesis 1-2 will put forth such flimsy explanations for the very plain statements of the expectation of the imminent return of Jesus.  Once again, if God did become man, and that man is Jesus Christ, can't we expect Him to know what He was talking about?

I've done a significant amount of reading about the eschatological belief called preterism, which claims that all of Jesus' end-times prophecies were fulfilled within the timeframe he predicted, specifically in 70AD during the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman army.  This is not the place for a discussion on eschatology, but I should say that neither futurism nor preterism have provided satisfactory explanations for Biblical end-times prophesy.

I am seeking to understand what Jesus really meant by his end-times prophecies, and how this fits in with the rest of Biblical teaching.  I especially am seeking to understand the implications of a successful eschatology on they way I view the world:  Is the world coming to an end, or is it getting better and better?  Is Jesus coming back, and will that be soon?

3. The dogma of Biblical inspiration and (secondarily) inerrancy 

I’m seeking to understand why some Christians believe in the doctrine of verbal, plenary inspiration. (The equal inspiration of every word of scripture)  Christians always give passages like 2 Peter 1:20-21 and 2 Timothy 3:16-17 as proof that the Bible (every single word of it) is equally inspired by God.  Why don't these Christians notice the blatant circularity of this claim?  A text within the New Testament that refers to "scripture" cannot be referring to the New Testament.  At best, these proof texts can only refer to the Hebrew Scriptures (The Old Testament), and any texts considered “scripture” at the time the proof-text was written, if any. 

I am seeking to understand the reality of Biblical inspiration as opposed to the dogma of Biblical inspiration.  I believe that the Bible is inspired, and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, but I am unconvinced by any argument for verbal, plenary inspiration that takes the form: "The Bible is inspired because it says it is inspired."  I realize that any "proof" of inspiration that refuses to grant authority to any source other than the Bible will always be circular.  I just wish that this fact were not constantly ignored.  

Of secondary importance is my desire to understand why some Christians believe in the inerrancy of the Bible.  This is only of secondary importance because I have come to a settled belief that this position is entirely indefensible.  Still, I am seeking to understand the implications of this apparent fact; On how it affects the way I should read the Bible, and how it affects the task of biblical interpretation. 

4. The relationship between the Old and New Testaments

This issue has troubled me from the time I was a little kid:  I am seeking to understand why God is portrayed so differently in the Old and New Testaments.  The God of the Old Testament commands his people to kill rebellious teenagers, beat their slaves to within an inch of their death, to destroy entire cities, killing all men, women, children and babies, (including nursing babies and "ripping open" pregnant women) and actively participates in these slayings by chucking hailstones from heaven.  In contrast, the God of the New Testament commands us to be peaceful, merciful,  to love our enemies, turn the other cheek, return blessing for evil, and to live at peace with everyone.  Are we talking about the same God here?

I understand that all people are sinners and deserve death.  God can choose to do whatever he wants.  This is not the issue.  I am seeking to understand why God's message to His people, His communication to them about what is important, and His overal approach to justice is so startlingly different between the Old and New Testaments.

5. The soverignty of God and the problem of Theodicy (the problem of the existence of evil)

This issue is a little different:  It involves two seemingly seperate issues on which I have come to a general understanding (or acceptance), but my thinking on these two issues is incompatible.

It is evident to me that God (in many occasions, if not all) chooses those with whom he is going to form a relationship: God chose Adam, not vice-versa.  God chose Noah, not vice-versa. God chose Abraham, not vice-versa.  God chose Moses, not vice-versa.  God chose the 12 disciples, not vice-versa.  You get the point.  And it's hard to deny the reality of election with Bible passages like Mark 13:20, Romans 8:29-30, Romans 9:14-24, and on and on... The entire Bible shows God constantly choosing us, not the other way around.  

Now, this doesn't mean we don't have a choice in whether to love God.  A man can choose to romantically pursue a particular woman, but she will still have a choice of whether to reciprocate.  Excuse the imperfect analogy, but this may be the situation between God and us.  And God's power to woo surely surpasses even that of Giacoma Cassanova.  Still, it is obvious to me that in some way, my relationship with God is more dependent on He than on me.

The second issue involves theodicy; the problem of existence of evil in the world, and the general lack of evidence for God's existence.  I've written about this before: To me it seems the best explanation for this is that God created us to love, and love cannot be forced.  Ironically, pastor-turned-atheist Dan Barker says it best:

It is a counterfeit love that is contingent upon authority, punishment, or reward. True love is respect and admiration, compassion and kindness, freely given by a healthy, unafraid human being.  [source]

I agree with Dan, and this is why God doesn't loudly proclaim His existence, doesn't do much to fix our broken world, and doesn't prove to us that He exists; He wants to give us a chance to love Him, and to do that He must give us the freedom to choose.

The problem lies in the integration of the two issues above.  If God chooses those with whom He has a relationship, then why is there evil in the world?  Why is there a need?  (And please, don't say "The Fall" - The fall came as a result of God giving Man a choice)  Conversely, if God values our free will enough to accept all the things that go along with it (i.e. evil, suffering) then does he really choose his "elect"?  In order to answer theses two questions, I must talk out of both sides of my mouth, and that really bothers me.  The answer may be as simple as my Cassanova example (above) but that has so far been unsatisfying.

So there's my list.  If you can help on any of the above, by all means, email me.  Or better yet, leave a comment on this post and let everyone benefit.  I have fantasies of someday writing a single post on each of the above, but I know better than to commit.  I'll just take it one post at a time.

About This Blog

About this blog

This is a blog about my faith. If you know me well, you know that I'm constantly asking questions. As a result, my "spiritual journey" hasn't exactly been smooth sailing. This blog is part of that journey. It is my conversation with no one in particular (at least not yet). In a very real way it is part of my conversation with God.

What is the purpose of this blog?

This blog started by functioning as my "mental clearing house". Any time an "issue" arises with my faith, my natural tendency is to think and dwell and chew it over until my metaphorical jaw hurts. I have found that even if I don't come to a positive conclusion, (and I usually do not) writing out the issue often allows me to move on. Clicking that "Publish Post" button is like flushing the toilet. I still use this blog in that way, but now I use it in other ways as well.

For a while, I wrote quite extensively on my experience coming to grips with the theory of evolution.  This was a story that I had written in many pieces, and it was good to get it all down in one place.  Lately, this blog has served as a place for me to organize my thoughts, and it has been helpful to have you, my "imaginary friends" to hash this stuff out with.

Who am I?

My name is Joe. I am a 30 year old male, with two kids under three years old. I work as a research scientist in a technology company. I work in the area of Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS), and my formal education includes an undergraduate degree in electrical engineering, and a master’s degree in materials science.  

I was raised in the very Dutch, very conservative, very Christian region of western Michigan. My parents were essentially Christian Reformed, and I grew up in a “Bible Church” that was basically Christian Reformed/Baptist in it’s theology. Growing up, I was taught that the earth is 6000-10,000 years old, and that the modern scientific description of the history of the universe was a false, deceptive idea, and was invented by Satan to help turn Christians into atheists.

I have retained many of the beliefs of my youth (albeit with many modifications): I go to a Baptist church and generally agree with most of the ideas expressed from the pulpit. However, I do believe that evolution (both animal and human) is undoubtedly the process by which we have come to be the way we are. I believe that God created us and the universe we live in, so I guess that makes me a theistic evolutionist, although I don’t really embrace the label. My switch from the young-earth beliefs of my youth to my current beliefs was a significant part of my spiritual journey, because it took me to the brink of atheism. The people in my church are mostly moderate Young Earth Creationists, so evolution is not generally accepted, but I have found that a vast majority of people (including some of the pastors) do not find my belief in a common ancestry troublesome. Actually, it doesn’t really come up much.

I have kept this blog semi-anonomous because it allows me to write in a very personal way, without worrying that someone who is only an acquaintance might wander upon it, and read something without knowing a lot about me. I’m not ashamed of any of this, but I can write more personally and transparently if I’m not worried about who might be watching.

Also, I've learned that anything that makes it into Google's "memory" can persist much longer than one might desire it to. Many years ago, as a geeky teenager, I posted a question to an online forum about some random geeky topic. When my name is "Googled", that post still shows up in the first page of results. How I wish I could give Google a lobotomy.

I don’t intend for my identity to be a secret to anyone who is sincerely interested in knowing more about me or what I write about. There are several people who know who I am and know about this blog, and that doesn’t bother me at all.  

If you have any questions, you can always email me.

Who are you?

When I write, I imagine that my audience is someone who is sincerely interested in the Truth. Someone who isn’t afraid to ask questions, and doesn’t accept things just because that’s what they’re told to believe. Someone who is willing to wrestle with their doubts, to admit them, address them, answer them, and move on. Someone who gains strength and faith and peace not by dismissing doubts or questions, but by looking them straight in the eye and seeing if they should be taken seriously.

Some of my posts can tend to be negative. This is because, as I said above, a major purpose of this blog is to acknowledge my doubts and move on. I don’t intend for these posts to spread doubt, but if I discuss something here it is because I think it is worth discussing. I’m reminded of a quote by Os Guinness:

We ourselves are called in question if we have no answer to doubt. If we constantly doubt what we believe and always believe-yet-doubt, we will be in danger of undermining our personal integrity, if not our stability. But if ours is an examined faith, we should be unafraid to doubt. If doubt is eventually justified, we were believing what clearly was not worth believing. But if doubt is answered, our faith grows stronger still. It knows God more certainly, and it can enjoy God more deeply. Faith is not doubt-free, but there is a genuine assurance of faith that is truly beyond a shadow of doubt. -Os Guinness, in God in the Dark: The Assurance of Faith Beyond a Shadow of Doubt  [pp.14]

The Duplicity of Me

I recently read Dallas Willard's book Renovation of the Heart: Putting on the Character of Christ.  Actually I read it several times.  It's an incredible book that I'm sure I'll write more about.  But for now there is one idea that I've been chewing on recently:

Willard describes what he calls "the duplicity of man" - This is our tendency to say we believe something, and want to act a certain way, and sometimes we do, but when it comes down to that knee-jerk response in the heat of the moment, our actions do not match up with our beliefs and convictions.  Of course, this is not a new idea.  Paul wrote about the problem in Romans 7:

When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Romans 7:21b-24

One of the main ideas of Willard's book is that this duplicity is not a required state of every believer; in fact, for a true disciple of Jesus it is not even a possible permanent state.  He suggests that a true disciple of Jesus will move beyond this duplicity into a "renovated character" where the desire of our heart (to look and act like Jesus) is what actually happens (most of the time).   

Building on this, Chapter 8 describes how, moment to moment, our actions are generally out of our control.  We are, to a significant degree, simply reacting to our circumstances in a way that is controlled by our thoughts and feelings at that moment.  This pattern of actions, over time, reveals our character.  Now, this doesn't mean that our actions are not our responsibility.  Our will enables us to make choices that affect our future thoughts and feelings, and this is why we are responsible for our character.

I've been chewing on these ideas for a while now, but they came to a poignant climax today.  In the last few days, I have experienced this duplicity in my own life with increasing awareness.  As I continue to strive to look and act more like Jesus, I have been making better choices, seeing fruit in my life.  But recently I have been placed in some situations where my actions were those "knee jerk" reactions that reveal my character.  And I was devastated.  

I guess I have always known this, but today I think I really saw for the first time what a horrible person I really am.  I want to be a good father but I am horribly impatient and get angry when my 2-year old acts like a 2-year old.  I want to be a good husband, and love my wife the way Christ loves his church, but when given the opportunity to serve her my gut reaction is to complain and be lazy and selfish.  I know that every person I meet is made in God's image, and I want to love them and treat them the way I want to be treated, but instead I am selfish, arrogant and disrespectful.  When someone takes something that I percieve to be mine, I want to react in love by giving them whatever else they need.  Instead I lash out in anger and self-righteousness.  Sadly I could go on and on.

This morning at church (today is Easter Sunday), our pastor talked about the life that we have access to through the death and resurrection of Jesus.  Not just life after death, but life now (he called it "life before death"), which includes freedom from the power of sin.  Once again, this is an old idea that is becomming newly significant to me. (It's also a huge component of another of Dallas Willard's books, The Divine Conspiracy)  As I listened to the sermon this morning, I was overcome by how little freedom I have from the power of sin.  I feel like sin has such a firm grasp on me that I am suffocating; The duplicity in my life is becoming unbearable.  

When I arrived home from this morning's Easter service, I was feeling pretty low.  All that talk and singing about Jesus giving us freedom from the power of sin was great, but simultaneously not feeling that freedom was excruciating.  But then something put me over the edge.  It was time for my daughter to take a nap, and she just wouldn't sleep. (She is so tired, why won't she just go to sleep!!)  Instead of patience and gentleness, my reaction to her defiance was outright anger and a desperate need for control, and then pride.  When naptime was over, I collapsed in a pile of frustration and tears.  If you have made it this far in this post, you deserve to know:  I thought the sobbing would not end.  We had a half-hour to make it to Easter dinner, so of course, it did end, but the experience had a lasting effect.

I don't know what the answer is; Why these sins seem like they will never ever leave... I know that in my life I have a thousand times told God that I want him to be Lord of my life, that I want Him to come in and remake me into someone that looks and acts like Jesus, and that there is nothing I can do to make our relationship right, short of my trust in Him.  And I will continue to tell Him that until I die.  So I wonder; why is this "life before death" not something that I am experiencing?  Or am I, and I am just expecting the wrong thing?  Or am I just a big lump of clay that desperately wants to be a pot, and thinks it is a pot, but really just needs to wait for the potter to continue His handiwork?  I think I'm willing to accept that this new-found hatred of my sin is a vital component to whatever He wants to do with me, if that is really the case.

But why am I so impatient!!!

I'll end with these lyrics from a Big Daddy Weave song titled Why.  It is my anthem for today.

Why do I do all the things that I do 

When I want to do what is right 

Change this wicked heart of mine 

Let me walk with you in the new life  

So what will ever put an end 

To my recurring bout with sin 

It seems I'm always at a loss for a way to win 

When what I really need to do 

Is to confront it with the truth 

And let Your words of life sink in and make my mind brand new  

A transformation that happens over time 

Is the product of a renewed mind  

Create in me a clean heart 

Place Your spirit deep inside 

Capture every thought 

'Till there's no place left to hide

Choosing to Believe

In my previous post, I talked about belief, and how our actions reveal what we truly believe.  One question that was left unanswered, however, is one posed by Richard Dawkins, among others:

Believing is not something you can decide to do as a matter of policy.  At least, it is not something I can decide to do as an act of will.  I can decide to go to church and I can decide to recite the Nicene Creed, and I can decide to swear on a stack of bibles that I believe every word inside them.  But none of that can make me actually believe it if I don't.  Pascal's Wager could only ever be an argument for feigning belief in God.  And the God that you claim to believe in had better not be of the omniscient kind or he'd see through the deception. [The God Delusion, p.104]

Dawkins makes a good point, one that  I struggled with it for a long time.  I didn't believe, and I knew it.  I really wanted to believe, but couldn't.  What advice would you give someone in this situation?  

For some, the issue really is that they don't want to believe.  For Dawkins, I suspect that he poses the question not out of a genuine desire to believe, but to simply point out that it is truly ridiculous to ask someone to "just believe".  He's right.  We can't just decide to change our beliefs. 

Like my last post, Dallas Willard's book, Renovation of the Heart can shed some light on this (at least it did for me).  Willard agrees with Dawkins:

We do not choose to believe (or not).  Our beliefs and feelings cannot be changed by choice.  We cannot just choose to have different beliefs and feelings...

But Willard continues:

 ...but we do have some liberty to take in different ideas and think about things in different ways. We can choose to take in the Word of God and when we do that beliefs and feelings will be steadily pulled in a Godly direction.

So if Dallas Willard is correct, (and I think he is) then we are not able, in the current moment, to change our beliefs by simply choosing to do so.  But this does not mean that belief is completely out of our control.  Our choices today can (and do) influence the things we believe tomorrow.  So if we choose to read and absorb the Bible and think in ways that will, over time, cause our beliefs to change.

Dawkins was correct when he wrote that:

I can decide to go to church and I can decide to recite the Nicene Creed...

True, he could decide to do that.  But he doesn't.  And of course, he doesn't believe.  I'm not saying that going to church or reciting a creed will help someone believe in God.  I am only saying (mostly from experience) that if one decides that he is going to live like God exists, his life will include things like going to church and reading the Bible.  And these activities, sincerely pursued, will slowly change his beliefs.

So we are responsible for our beliefs, but not in a direct way.  This has great implications for how we present the Gospel.  In Willards words:

One of the worst mistakes that can be made in practical ministry is to think that people can choose to believe and can feel differently.  Following that, we will mistakenly try to generate faith by going through the will, possibly trying to move the will by playing on emotion.  Rather, the will must be moved by insight into truth and reality.  Such insight will evoke emotion, appropriate to a new set of the will.  That is the order of real inward change.

My pastor frequently says things like: 

You're too busy to read your Bible? Well, you see, we make time for the things that are important to us.  So make time to read your Bible.

Is it just me, or does that not make sense at all?  How does that change whether I find it important to read my Bible?  And if what he says is true, I will not begin to read my Bible until I find it relevant to my life.  My will can do nothing (over the long run) to change my habits.  My Bible reading will come through a change in my inner character, which will in turn change my priorities.

 In the same way, no amount of willpower will enable me to believe something that I do not see adequate evidence for.  True belief will come through experience of the truth of God's existence.