Logic and the mystical

Over the centuries, logic has earned a bad reputation and negative labels,  such as "cold", "rigid" or "impersonal". But like any tool, these kinds of labels only apply when the tool is misused.  Do we condemn knives because they can be used to kill people?  Do we ban automobiles because thousands die, each year, due to negligence in their use?  Or even more extreme, should we make water illegal because many die in its embrace?  To all three, we answer,  "no".
So too with logic.  Just because people try to use it to justify crime,  immorality and manipulation, does not make the tool immoral.  As a former private high school teacher,  one of the biggest mistakes I have seen made is that of teaching logic to high school students.  First of all, from my experience, until someone learns how to love and live self sacrificially, they will never use logic properly.  High school students are far too proud, irrational and self centered to be able to handle a tool like logic, properly.
The other problem is that a contrast is often made between logic and the mystical, as if they are polar opposites. These two ought not be held against each other, as if they only work against one another.  They are complimentary and in fact, build one another up, when used properly.
In the historic Christian faith, the spiritual/mystical is a very real portion of our beliefs.  There is much in life that is simply beyond the rational /irrational dichotomy.  Mysticism is outside of this categorization.  But it is not illogical.  Often times, someone will say, "well that simply doesn't make sense.  It's illogical." When what they actually mean is that it is not part of their belief system.  It is something that does not fit into their worldview.  Big difference.
To be able to say that something is illogical, one must understand the standard that is being used to judge that particular.  While belief in seven day creation may seem ridiculous and illogical to someone who denies the existence of God,  this doctrine is perfectly reasonable to a Christian.  But one would expect nothing else.  To label the virgin birth as nonsense only exposes ones lack of understanding of Christianity.  The virgin birth is perfectly logical, and in fact, expected, in the Christian worldview.  If one believes in the Triune God and understands how that God has acted throughout history,  one would expect a virgin birth, when reading the gospels.
So the mystical details of the Christian faith;  the Eucharist, the regenerative nature of baptism, and the expectation of sanctification in the life of the Christian by the right use of the sacraments and confession/repentance, are understood within the Christian worldview, they are all perfectly logical.
What this really comes down to is the necessity of our being able to think clearly and the willingness to work through the details of our faith.  If we feel the need to defend our faith.

Gates of hell

A fairly well known passage in Scripture (Matt 16:18) speaks of Jesus establishing his church and the gates of hell not prevailing against it.  There has been a large amount of discussion about this passage over the centuries, most of it in defense of the Roman Catholic church.  But I have been thinking, as of late, about the straightforward meaning of this passage.  Regardless of ones opinion of the church of Rome, Jesus makes an incredible promise here.  The church will never fall.
It really is that simple.  All of the modern day hoo-ha about end times, the mark of the beast and the rapture is nonsense, in light of this passage.  Satan is not going to gain the upper hand,  the church is not going to be driven off the face of the earth.  Satan is not going to rule, for any length of time.  Hell will not prevail.
Aside from the fact that dispensational premillenialism has no support from Scripture or the history of the church,  this passage destroys such pessimistic nonsense.  God has promised to give, has given and continues to give the Holy Spirit, for the direction of his church.  He is never going to leave us or betray us.
Simply stated, the church will always stand and she will always be filled by and led by, the Holy Spirit.

Responsibility

Everyone has some form of responsibility in their life.  Some more than others,  but no one is exempt, even those on the extremes,  monks and convicts.
Primarily,  we have responsibility for ourselves.  If one listens to American culture, we should be responsible for our health, for our retirement plan and for the financial future's of our offspring.  While these things may be all good and right, they are far from primary.
I would like to use a metaphor to make my point.  If one is training for a marathon,  should he be concerned that his clothes color coordinate?  Or that his fingernails are well trimmed? Definitely not the first point and only the second point, if it is far down the list of things to address.
The one training ought to be concerned with caloric intake, with adequate sleep, and ultimately with proper training, shortly said, getting out there and running, alot. But this responsibility of determining which things are important to address and how to address then will be controlled by our final goal.  If our goal in running in a marathon is to have our name on a list and possibility our picture in the paper as "a marathon runner", then we likely will be concerned about color coordination.
If our goal in life is to live as long as possible in order to obtain as many possessions as possible, then yes, we will be concerned about our retirement plan and our savings account. But if we call ourselves Christian,  we really should have a different perspective.
What are doing to prepare our souls for eternity?  When we die (at what time we do not know), we will step into the immediate presence of absolute holiness. Are we ready for this? Have we been working toward the love of God and the despising of evil? Or have we spent our time distracted by entertainment?
And I have only addressed ourselves at this point.  What about those others in our circle of responsibility?  Our spouses, our children,  our loved ones,  our neighbors? What are we doing to help direct others toward holiness?
God has given us the church, his Word, the sacraments and one another to prepare for eternity.  We have our own sinful inclinations, the temptations of the world and and attacks of evil ones fighting against us. It will be hard work, a battle, an uphill climb.
Let us make use of the tools that God has given us and not be distracted by the easy life of modern America.
Far too much is at stake.

Three voices

As of late, I have been watching instructional videos on interpersonal communication.  One particularly interesting concept introduced is that of the three voices with which we speak: the parent voice,  the child voice and the adult voice.
The child voice is, as one would expect, the voice/approach to communication, that we used when we were children. The parent voice is the voice we use when we are instructing or leading someone.  We are speaking from a position of authority. The adult voice is one we use when we are speaking with an equal,  dialoging to achieve an agreed upon goal.
Each of these voices has its place and it is our responsibility as adults to use the appropriate voice. Upon becoming an adult, the child voice is one that is supposed to go silent.  The child voice is that one that whines, complains and points fingers.  Unfortunately,  far too many adults still use the child voice.
Learning to recognize these voices and put them under conscious control is our responsibility.  And it will certainly be to our advantage to do so.
But as interesting as all of this is, the really interesting part of this appears when we apply this to our faith.
From the initial call of God to Abram, out of Chaldea, up to the time of Christ,  God dealt with the Jews in a parent/child manner.  God spoke in the parent voice and the Jews responded as children, thus, the children of Israel, which is all good and fine, as they were children. One very important point to see here is that of external law.  When God dealt with the Jews, it was all in an external, legalistic,  "follow these rules", fashion. It was very straightforward and clear.  God gave the instruction,  his children were to obey.
But with the incarnation, death and resurrection of Jesus, this all changed.  The law (the old covenant) was fulfilled and would very soon pass away.  By AD 70, it was all over. Jerusalem was destroyed,  the Jews were scattered and the church was flourishing. And how was God dealing with his people, the church, now?   He had given them the Holy Spirit, in their hearts, no longer written on slabs of stone.  God became man, so that man could become God, i.e. God restored us to our place WITH him,  not under him or groveling at his feet.  Sons not servant,  in one sense, equals.
God now speaks to us, no longer as children,  a firm parent speaking to an immature child,  but as grown sons, dialoging as we strive toward holiness,  a synergistic work,  God and man working together to achieve a desired goal.
Let us learn to respond to God's voice to us, as adults, not children.

Christianity in Russia

People will argue that the Orthodox Christianity in Russia really is not a legitimate religious practice, but simply a cultural one.  That people there are not really Christians because the religion with which they identify is identified with only because it is the culture of their country, not their personal faith.  But to argue as such really misses some important points.
Yes, it is true that the Christian Orthodox faith is the culture of the nation of Russia.  And I cannot overemphasize just how valuable that is.  Those in the US cannot conceive of or understand what this means.  The USA was founded on rugged individualism and religious freedom.  But both of these things are contrary to the Christian faith, but in different ways.  We are not rugged individuals.  The Christian is part of the body of Christ and should be involved in a very regular basis in the life of the church.  This means weekly communion (at least), and living the calendar of the church.
The situation in Russia has that as its lifeblood.  While it may be true that many there do not practically live out the Orthodox life, what is true is that that life of community and church as center is.  I have heard that the common, everyday Russian, when walking by a church, will cross himself, religious or not.  This is amazing.  This means that even the non religious, regular guy on the street, has reverence to the church in his blood.
The very positive end to this is in the massive power of influence the church will have on the lives of people.  The church is not viewed as a small sliver of ones existence, that is given a cursory nod, maybe once a week, or maybe even just on Christmas or Pascha (Easter).  For many Americans, religion is relegated to a personal relationship with Jesus, that may or may not involve church attendance, but is definitely something that is kept to ones self. 
In Russia, the church is the ebb and flow of life.  In smaller towns, this is seen even in the architecture of the city.  The church is actually the center of town.
It really comes down to what is central, what is foundational, what is the basis of society, even at the subconscious level.  Russia has retained that foundation of church, even through the horrors of the Soviet era.  Unfortunately, America, if it had it at one time, has walked far away from that kind of foundation.

2 Timothy 3:1-5

For some reason, this passage came to mind this morning, and I have been thinking about it all day,  especially verse 4, where we are told that men will be lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God. So I thought I would share some thoughts on the passage.
The apostle Paul, the author here, is writing to Timothy, a young pastor of a first generation church.  Timothy is of Jewish heritage and his church is a mix of former Jews and Gentiles.
As the chapter starts, Paul is explicit,  "in the last days men will be....." First things first.  We must not stumble on the meaning here.  We must not miss the Jewish elements so prevalent here.  As Jesus had fulfilled all the requirements of the old covenant,  it is passing away and will soon (in the original readers context) disappear.  And this has happened with every single other instance of covenantal judgment for covenantal unfaithfulness, so too now with the Jews rejection and crucifixion of Jesus.  God's ultimate act of love for his covenant people only resulted in their final rejection of him.  So now, the covenantal judgment will fall, death will come upon those who have rejected the new covenant head,  Jesus.
These are the last days of which Paul speaks.  The time of the old covenant and the Jews is coming to an end.
Paul gives a list of what the lifestyle of these people will look like: lovers of themselves, lovers of money,  proud, blasphemous, etc., etc. I want you to notice a couple of things here.  First,  these are men guilty of blasphemy.  Blasphemy only makes sense in a religious context.  As verse five says, these men have a form of godliness but deny it's power.
These are the Jews of whom Paul speaks.  These perilous times are referring to those people who claim a very religious life, yet live a life of selfish debauchery.
Two things must then be asked.  One,  what is meant by "lovers of pleasure"?  On one hand,  who alive is not a lover of pleasure?  Which one of us does not look forward to sleeping on a comfortable bed, in a warm house,  driving to work in a climate controlled car to work in a climate controlled office?  We choose from a myriad of culinary possibilities, the possibilities unparalleled at any time in history.  We wear comfortable clothes,  are meticulously clean, healthy and well rested.
Is this what Paul is talking about? Not specifically. It is important to recognize that we cannot compare our lifestyle with that of previous centuries.  What is normal and balanced for us today, would be sheer opulence  200 years ago.  We must look at comparative context.  Paul here is talking about a heart issue.  Paul is talking about the loves that direct our lives.  Do we live for pleasure?  What is on our mind, when we are not preoccupied with the necessities of life? Are we focused on scrumptious meals,  luxurious vacations,  mindless entertainment,  the opposite sex? Is our life and the money we earn focused on the pleasure and entertainment of the this temporal life?  This is what Paul is talking about.
Second,  what do we do about it? We need to wake up.  We need to step back and look at what WE are doing and spending.  Don't look at anyone else, don't compare yourself to anyone else. Where is your heart?
Paul tells us to turn away from such people.  If you are one of those people, Paul is telling you to change.
Perilous times were coming for people such as these in Paul's day.  The same will only be true for men in our day, or any day.  While temporal judgment is no longer hanging over us, we do still have the final judgment ahead.  This is not a judgment for sin,  Jesus already took that upon himself.  This is a judgment of responsibility.  What have we done with the life, love and power that God has given us in Jesus Christ?  Have we squandered it all on trinkets and empty entertainments?  Have we spent all of our time distracting and pleasuring ourselves?
The responsibility of the gospel is right in front of us. Don't miss it.

Balance

An interesting point was made the other day that really set some things in order. It was the idea of not glorying in our successes. That phrase should sound odd. Of course, I am not suggesting that we glory in failure. The idea that I want to suggest is that of balance.
Much of how we handle our successes or failures has to do with our view of sanctification.  Our natural response to a successful endeavor is usually happiness.  So far, so good.  But another fruit of success can often be pride.  Especially in the realm of temptation.  If we successfully ward off some form of temptation,  we may immediately be tempted to think highly of ourselves and our spiritual maturity.  Which will immediately lead to a fall into some other sin. Usually because we are nowhere near as holy as we think we are.
But on the other hand,  when we fail, we may be tempted to give up and consider ourselves beyond forgiveness. So where is the balance?
When we successfully avoid any particular temptation,  yes, we should be pleased that we resisted sin.  But we should immediately respond with thankfulness for God's continued intervention and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We only succeeded because of the grace of God. We need to make it an automatic response of caution and attention.  We need to learn to know ourselves,  where we are weak.
And on the flip side of this, when we fall into sin, the only thing God wants from us is repentance and confession.  We fall down and we immediately get up again and keep working at holiness. Instead of beating ourselves up, we need to recognize why we fell and not make that same mistake again.
Repentance, confession and humility.

Interpreting circumstances

Interpreting circumstances is a dangerous endeavor, especially when they are our own.  It is a fairly common practice in Christendom to try to interpret those things taking place around us.  We hear things about God doing this or that or not doing such and such, for some reason.  But the problem is our own extreme limitations, and our tendency to be selfish.  The human life is such short period of time, our own experiences and understanding of history is so incredibly limited and our overall vision of the current state of all things puts us in a position where we really cannot speak with any authority or understanding, when interpreting how circumstances appear or ought to be.

In most situations, we simply do not have enough wisdom or understanding to be able to say, “X is best” or “Y should have gone like such and such.”  But this is not about being fatalistic.  Because the very foundation of who we are is built on love of God and love of neighbor, we must strive to live out that command to love, in the best way that can.  Our understanding may be limited, but we must still act according to principle and conscience.  And when things don’t go the way that we think they should, we must have faith in the love and direction of God.  We are never assured of understanding any particular circumstance. 

We are required to have faith.

Covenants identity and details

One of the arguments that modern evangelicals post against covenant theology is that of identity.  They say,  "God called the Israelites his people. He would not leave them just in order to embrace a different bunch of sinners."
But then it occurred to me. God didn't leave the Israelites, they left him.  There is a  regular pattern in covenant theology.  Each time the current leader of the covenant dies, the rest of the people fall into horrible sin.  Judgment them upon falls, God raises up a new leader,  leads  some of the people through that judgment, and gives more details of his covenant.
This is exactly what has happened with Jesus Christ.  Jesus took the identity of Israel upon himself,  suffered the judgment for Israel's horrible sin,  but God raised him up and lead the few faithful Israelites through that judgment.
He has now given them/us the New Covenant.  God didn't turn his back on the Jews.  He provided a way for them to pass through the judgment against the Old Covenant unfaithful.  Those that listened and followed the new covenant head came into new life and the New Covenant.  Those that didn't turned away from his offer of salvation.

Consideration of worldview

I would like to try to combine a few thoughts that have been plaguing me as of late, of which I have written here.  Some groups within the Christian fold claim that no one can be genuinely happy unless they are a Christian.  And that if someone claims otherwise, they are simply lying because they do not want anything to do with God.
But I have a hard time with that.  I know a pretty wide range of people, many of whom are not Christians, and they seem to project an image of happiness or contentedness.  Maybe it is all a facade, but it would impossible to prove.  Here are my thoughts.
When a child is growing up, his parents communicate to him, both consciously and unconsciously, that things are important, what things are to be sought after and what things are not important.  The child then begins to think on his own, and in most cases, will follow in the path that his parents have started for him.  If he grows and is successful, according to the standards that have been set for him, by his parents and his culture, he will have a sense of accomplishment and contentedness.  Sometimes, upon achieving that goal, or at least hovering around that goal, if some level of spirituality is not included, the child will realize a sense of something missing and will seek out that missing spirituality.
But here is the hard part.  When a child achieves the success that parents and culture have set for him and there is included a sliver of morality/spirituality, there is a fuller sense of accomplishment and therefore no need to seek anything further.  They have achieved what they were raised to achieve.
But this level of temporal accomplishment is far from what the historic church has always held as valuable. Being comfortable, wealthy, healthy and distracted is possibly the greatest foe to achieving holiness.  But if that goal of holiness has never been communicated, but something else, with a sheen or morality is in its place, that holiness will not be pursued or understood as valuable.
This is why the modern form of American Evangelicalism is failing in America.  No need is seen for pursuing holiness, when happiness is already present, when the pre defined goal has already been achieved and the shallow, relatively ignorant and short sighted religiosity is incapable of answering the attacks of critics.
It is easy to stay distracted when the world is at our fingertips, when we are comfortable and when the goal that has been fed to us our entire lives is already in hand.  The church needs to respond.

Interpretive Framework

Protestants handle the Bible just like Muslims handle the Qoran, like Buddhists handle the Book of the Dead and Hindus handle the Bhagavad Gita.  As if all we have is a collection of letters from a now practically absent God, who will return at some unknown future time, to judge us all for what was written.

The Orthodox Church handles the Bible as one aspect of how God communicates to us.  We now serve a living, present, active God, who leads his objective church, by his Holy Spirit.  The Church recognized, canonized, and interprets the Bible.  It is handled and understood properly only within the framework of the church. 

This is why the Protestant world is fragmented.  There is no final authority to whom appeal is made in understanding Scripture.  It has all been reduced to private interpretation.

Learning to Balance

1) information in the world around us

2) acting on that information from a Christian foundation

3) offering prayers on that information

4) understanding that most things are beyond our control

5) understanding that all things are ours to pray about

Religious Freedom

I have been reading about the large scale resurgence of Orthodoxy in Russia.  Technically, Russia has been an officially Christian Orthodox nation since AD 988, when the government embraced Orthodoxy as the national religion.  With the exception of the small blip of soviet atheism beginning around 1920, Russia has been Christian.  Since the fall of communism, there has been a massive building process currently taking place.  In Moscow, currently, there is an official plan to build 200 Orthodox churches.

But some people are complaining.  The claim is that the government is showing favoritism to the Orthodox, at the expense to the religious minorities in the country.  But I have to ask, “would you expect anything different?”  The country is historically Orthodox.  There are currently no laws in place that forbid any citizen from believing and practicing a different faith.  But there are laws that limit the activity by those practicing other faiths.  Why would it be otherwise?

One important thing to remember in this regard is that Russia is not the US.  Russia was not built upon the supposed religious freedom of Protestantism.  We cannot judge the Russian nation by Protestant standards or ideas.  The nation of Russia is Christian Orthodox.  The depth of that religious practice in its people is not a discussion topic at this point.  I am talking about the official religious status and the structure of the culture.

Should not a nation be free to choose its own religious path and/or be free to practice that faith without interference from other foreign religious influence? No one seems to complain that Saudi Arabia is officially Muslim, or that India is officially Hindu or that Thailand is officially Buddhist, or even China’s official atheism.  All of these places have official positions of religious tolerance, but practically speaking, differing religious practice is difficult.  But it is a situation that one would expect, especially in a nation that takes its religious faith seriously.  Perceived truth ought to be embraced and practiced truth.

I would suggest that “political correctedness” has taken control.  We need to strive to be Orthodox, not culturally PC.  There may be a difference.

Instruction

In the Protestant world, particularly within Calvinism, the standard approach is to learn as much as you can.  It is a very academic world, built around knowledge and understanding.
But the historic Orthodox world is quite different.  This is not to say that Orthodoxy is anti-intellectual, far from it.  The historic church contains some very brilliant minds.  In Orthodoxy, the emphasis/goal is theosis. In short, we are to become a much like God as is humanly possible. So this means we must strive after purity and holiness.
With that in mind, the idea of obedience comes to mind.  Two things here: The Orthodox faith is very organic and we do not lose our individuality when we become part of the church.
Very high on our list of things to seek, is a spiritual father.  This is someone who has been a faithful, mature Christian for a long time and has much wisdom.  When we find that spiritual father, his wisdom and instruction is for us. We cannot, safely, take the specific instruction from another father and apply it to ourselves, indiscriminately.  Specific wisdom is for specific people at specific times.
In short, we no longer live under law, by which we follow a set of rules.  We are now under grace, filled with the Holy Spirit. God has given us godly examples we are to emulate and learn from.
Find a spiritual father and learn to obey.

Seeing but not believing

In my multiple interactions with atheists,  I often become frustrated at their varied responses, which really summarize down to one thing,  "give me some verifiable proof, so that then I will believe."
But it just occurred to me (literally). When we read in the gospel accounts of Jesus' resurrection, in three different responses we see a common theme.  When Mary saw Jesus at the tomb,  when the disciples saw Jesus on the road to Emmaus, and when Thomas was told of first hand accounts of Jesus' resurrection,  none of them believed upon "seeing" Jesus.  It wasn't until they interacted with him, that they recognized him.
It will be the same with atheists.  No matter how strong or passionate our explanations and arguments, they will not believe.  Atheists need to interact.  The atheist needs to seek out and interact with God before they will believe.
Let us pray that they have that opportunity before they pass into eternity.