World With A View

[This is a speech I presented for my Toastmasters International group Thursday, October 12, 2006. It's one of my better speeches, so I figured I'd catalog it here. It uses the material from one of my previous posts, Enjoy! - Graffy]

Two months is too little. They let him go. They had no // Sudden healing. To think that providence would // Take a child from his mother while she prays // Is appalling. ...

Christian recording artist Natalie Grant recently re-recorded the song "Held". As I heard it played over the airwaves the first time, I must admit, my first reaction was to change the station. Why? Because I just don't care for mushy songs. But these lyrics grabbed my attention and they brought to the forefront of my mind one question and one question only: Why? Why would God take a child from his mother while she fervently prays to Him for his life? (The song is based on a true story, after all.)

But I'm not really interested in dealing with that question, here. Rather, I'd like to explore why anyone would ask that question in the first place. Better yet, how do we understand the things that hapen in our lives, the good and the evil?

Before we can really explore this idea, I must first point out that everyone has a worldview. What is a worldview? Simply, a worldview is a set of beliefs we use to interpret reality. That said, someone might object (if only for the sake of argument) and say, "Wait a minute! I don't have a worldview. I don't interpret reality!"

Yet if this is true, then they obviously don't interpret reality because they believe reality is not meant to be interpreted - it has no meaning. The things which happen to us are meaningless, purposeless and random - life has no point. Such a worldview is known as nihilism - nothing matters. It is a very dangerous and irresponsible wordldview, but it is a worldview nonetheless.

That said, we can know that everyone has a world view. George Bush has a worldview. Osama Bin Laden has a worldview. Everyone here is well-acquainted with both these men's worldviews to know that they are very, very different. In fact, no matter what you may think of our President, I hope I can get at least a grudging agreement here that George Bush's worldview is a morally better one than Osama Bin Laden's.

That brings me to my next point. Not only does everyone have a worldview, but we can judge between worldviews as one being better or worse than another. Of course, when I say this, I'm likely to offend someone's very American pluralistic sensibility. They may raise an objection saying,

"Wait a minute! Don't go judging me. What's true for you is true for you. What's true for me is true for me. I don't judge you and you don't judge me. And besides, can't we all just get along?"

Such an objection, although well-intentioned, implies the idea that all worldviews are equally valid. But if we were to hold to that viewpiont, then we have to include everyone's worldview. In essence, this is saying that Billy Graham's worldview is no better than Adolf Hitler's - they're only different. I'd really like to find someone we could count as sane who would honestly believe that Adolf Hitler's worldview was just as valid as Billy Graham's.

Thus, if everyone has a worldview, and some worldviews are inherently better than others, then we are implying that some worldviews are right and others are wrong. Some are good and others are bad. Yet the moment we assert any one thing is right or good and another is wrong or bad, we are appealing to a greater truth which we use to tell the difference between them. This then, is central to my speech, so please listen carefully:

There is an objective truth which defines reality as we know it (repeat 1x)

Let me close with a comparison to illustrate my point. To do so, I must compare three major world religions, Buddhism, Islam, and Christianity, and I will not compare them all favorably. Please understand it is not my wish to denigrate the beliefs of the adherents of any one religion below those of another - I am not speaking about the beliefs of any relgious adherent. I am merely comparing what these religions as institutions teach to their adherents.

Let us return to our mother grieving the loss of her two-month-old son in my introduction. Let us assume this mother is a Buddhist. What worldview does Buddhism teach?

Buddhism teaches the law of karma. That is, through the concept of reincarnation, the sins of one's past life are paid for in their next life. Eventually, through a series of lives, the Buddhist believer can purify themselves, and, having finally lived a perfect life, can attain to Nirvana, where Buddha himself is supposed to reside. Yet there is no guarantee that the faithful will ever reach Nirvana. It is possible that they would spend eternity living each life paying for sins of the last. Thus, Karma is a negative doctrine of unforgiveness and condemnation.

Therefore, if Buddhism is the objective truth which defines reality as we know it, then our Buddhist mother should be greatly comforted to know that her son died because of sins he committed in a previous life and she herself is suffering his loss because of sins she committed in a previous life.

Suppose, then, that our mother is a Muslim. What worldview does Islam teach? Islam teaches that God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. But, he's not personal - not knowable. Additionally, in Islam, both good and evil come directly from God. There is never a question of God's will. It is merely, "whatever Allah wills."

Therefore, if Islam is the objective truth which defines reality as we know it, then our Muslim mother should be greatly comforted to know that although Allah knows about her pain, He does not care. And what's more, He caused it.

Finally, let us assume our mother is a Christian. If Christianity is the objective truth which defines reality as we know it, then our Christian mother should be greatly comforted to know that God knows about her loss. He did not want her son to die, He did not cause her son's death, and He is not punishing her for any sin she may have committed by letting him die and not answering her prayers.

He even grieves with her over her loss. He knows her pain. He lost a Son once too, you know. And she should also be comforted to know that God never promised to protect anyone from the pains of a sinful world. Rather, as a the song says,

"the promise was, when everything fell, we'd be held."

Pangs of Conscience

It has been my experience that if one wishes to hear the voice of God in their lives, obedience is requisite. I suppose I should qualify that: it is not obedience itself that brings God's voice and direction into our lives, but rather our willful obedience to the "pangs of conscience" that God brings upon us.

I remember a speaker once shared about a speaking engagement he took in Alaska. While there, he was invited by one of his hosts to go sledding. The speaker's host raced in dog sled races across Alaska and was proficient at the sport. After the two had gone out for a short ride and were later relaxing and discussing Alaskan life, the speaker commented to his host,

"Mike, I couldn't help but notice that when you were driving those dogs, you spoke barely above a whisper to command them to go left or right - and they heard you every time. How did you train them to do that?"

The host simply replied, "Jeff, it's because they're doing what they were made to do."

The host knew his dogs had an innate drive to pull that sled as fast and as hard as they could. He knew it was their joy and passion to do the very thing he wanted them to do. They were in tune with their master's voice because his voice made it possible for them to do what they did best more fully. Thus, they were always listening for and anticiapting his next command. Such sensitivity to the master's voice never requires shouting.

When I became a member of the Presbyterian church I was rasied in, I had to learn the Westminster Shorter Chatechism. The first tenet of that Chatechism is, "The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever." I have come to see it as one of the most succintly and efficiently expressed theological treatises on the purpose of mankind ever written. It states what the Bible echoes from the Genesis through Revelation: We are built to glorify and worship God. And when we do what we are built to do, we thoroughly enjoy it.

Experienceing the presence of God in our lives means doing what He has made us to do. All of reality must be interpreted through our ultimate design: to honor and glorify God with our lives. If we are truly doing what we are meant to do, God doesn't need to shout orders or jerk the reigns of our faith to force us to go in a direction we don't want to go. Balanced on the fulcrum of our conscience, God's whispers lever us upward. With the very least whisper, He can send us catapulting into His will for our lives.

I have, in the last few years, found myself experiencing what I would call an "enhanced conscience". That is, a conscience that gives me a greater sensitivity to right and wrong. Yet I've found that when I respond to the pangs of my more sensitive conscience and grieve the sins I commit (no matter how small or unnoticed the sin may be), the result is not self-abasement, but gratitude.

Conviction from God does not leave the Christian with a lesser view of himself but rather a greater understanding of God's character. Thus, by responding to even the smallest tugs of our conscience over matters so slight that the offended would never know they had been wronged, we grow closer to God. We respond with gratitude for the convictions of our consciences, not because God has revealed to us a little bit more the depth of our depravity, but because He has shown us a little bit more the depth of His holiness.

[Pardon the fluffy devotional with zero Scripture references. It's been a tough week.]

- Graffy

Romans 12:1,2 Review Notes

I have recently posted two studies of Romans 12:1 & 2. The first is Celebrity Spirituality and the second is The Pig of God?. Technically, this would be the third part of a three-part series, but for the sake of time, I've simply opted to post a semi-outline of both verses here. Anyway, we begin with our key text:

Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.

The verses break simply into three parts: verse 1, verse 2a, and verse 2b.

Offer your bodies as living sacrifices (v. 1)

1. Sacrifice is "holy"

2. Sacrifice pleases God

3. Sacrifice is a "logical service" (in the original Greek).

4. Sacrifice costs us in various ways (financially, emotionally, physically)

Do not conform to the pattern of this world (v. 2a)

1. Conform - in Greek, to "unite one's appearance"

2. "Pattern of this world" - in Greek, an "age" or time chacterized by popular ideas / beliefs.

3. Literally means, "Do not join your appearance to the popular trends of the day" (Think Bill Clinton or Oprah Winfrey, here)

Be transformed by the renewing of your mind (v. 2a)

1. Transform - in Greek, "metamorphoo" or "change form"

2. Renewing - in Greek, implies a sense of freshness as opposed to youthfulness.

3. Literally means, "See yourself changed by the continual freshness of your mind"

Paul is describing the process of sanctification (not the event). The "change in form" is to mirror the Godly inner nature the Christian already posesses. The "freshness" of mind is the conviction of the Holy Spirit / God's Word.

Test and approve God's will (v. 2b)

1. "Test and approve" ("prove") - in Greek, means to test with the expectation of passing.

2. God's Will - God's desire (not God's sovereign will). God's desire is:

i. That you be sanctified (see v. 2a and 1 Thess. 4:3)

ii. Good - in Greek, "good by nature" (intrinsic goodness) not "good in appearance"

iii. Pleasing - "fully agreeable" (to God)

iv. Perfect - "Complete" - it's all a Christian needs for spiritual and mental well-being.

A Week Off... Sort of.

Two months is too little. They let him go. They had no // Sudden healing. To think that providence would // Take a child from his mother while she prays // Is appalling. ...

[Chorus]
This is what it means to be held. // How it feels when the sacred is torn from your life // And you survive. // This is what it is to be loved. // And to know that the promise was // When everything fell we'd be held.

Natalie Grant, "Held", from the album Awaken

Pesonally, I'm no fan of mushy songs. In my estimation, Natalie Grant's song is all of that. However, when I first heard it, what kept me from turning the dial was how she would answer the unasked question: Why does a good God let bad things happen - to even His own?

Since we took a break from Tuesday night as most attendees are preparing for finals (Good luck, guys!), I thought I'd address an idea that's been on my mind, especially lately.

There's a man who attends our church who came from Chicago. He's Greek in origin and physically, he's built like a rock. I haven't really gotten to know his entire story, but I do know he's had a pretty tough go of things. For example, occupational hazards left him with MS which has progressively worsened. When I first met him, he needed a cane to walk - then two. Now he's confined to a wheelchair. Add to that numerous other health complications, two failed marriages and a daughter who is so rebellious she can't live at home and you have a person who's seen a lot of the bad things life has to offer. He's got a heart of gold though, and he's loved by our congregation - many of whom have gone well out of their way to help him as his health has worsened. It's a tough story, but what made it tougher was the news I recieved via our email prayer chain Sunday. Apparently, his house was broken into and he was severly beaten. Last report was that he was in the hospital and not doing very well. When I read the news I was simply dumbfounded. Of all the people to attack, why a guy bound to a wheelchair?

I've often heard the unbeliever's battle cry (which is often more a criminal accusation than an honest question), that if God were good and really loved us, He'd not let these sorts of things happen. It is a valid question - regardless of what one believes (or their reasons for asking it), and I honestly believe that how a religion or faith answers this question is telling of the essential nature of its dogma.

For example, in Islam, both good and bad come from God. God is not personal, He's not knowable, He does what He wills and there's no rhyme or reason to it - only the knowledge that God sees, knows, and can do everything. Thus, no matter what events befall a faithful Muslim, it is "whatever Allah wills", be it good or bad. Ultimately, there isn't even any guarantee of salvation for the faithful. As a Muslim, maybe God will save you, maybe He won't. There's no way to know for sure

In Buddhism / Hinduism, God is not really real. There is God, but not in any real sense, and the pain and evil one suffers in life is due to the results of past sins. Karma and reincarnation comprise a system of eternal punishment - you spend each life paying for the last. Eternal unforgiveness.

So what sets Christianity apart from other religions on this question?

Francis Schaeffer was a prolific writer and apologist who was stricken with cancer at the end of his life. Asked by a reporter how he felt to be told he's dying of cancer, Schaeffer responded, (to paraphrase), "Why shouldn't I get cancer and die?" He went on to point out that this world is one marred by sin and that his hope was not a happy and healthy life here, but in the hereafter.

Knowing this is what gives us staying power. It seems to be an ongoing phenomenon that unless you're "experienceing God" in some tangible way (from speaking in tongues to getting unexpected checks in exactly needed amounts), then you're missing out. I will readily admit that it's a valid desire, especially in this age, to want to feel something in one's spirituality. But if you ask many well-meaning Christians what makes their faith real to them, you'll likely hear about those mystery checks or those moments of ecstatic emotional sentiment that makes God so real.

I'm not saying that tangible proof of God's blessings in our lives should be disregarded, but it seems to me that many Christians are quick to put the cart before the horse. After all, what would happen when somone has an "off" Sunday and they leave worship feeling empty or unfulfilled or the money gets tight and that mystery check never comes?

I find it often helps to check faith with Scripture. Regarding how we are to love God, Jesus simply stated, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." (Matthew 22:37, NIV)

The idea is fairly simple: Our relationship with God is more than just emotional. In fact, to really study the idea, it is our wills that we use to worship God, not our emotions. Emotinal sentiments are secondary. That is, what gives our faith staying power is not merely knowing what we believe (or experience), but why we believe it.

It's been said that you can learn more by studying your Bible every morning over breakfast than you can in four years of seminary. One great way to strengthen your faith and learn about the Bible is to ask the challenging questions. You know, the ones you think of that don't really seem to have an answer...

Go ahead. Ask the questions you think don't have answers. Then go looking for answers and don't stop until you find them. Not only will the search itself will enrich you greatly, but you may even find you were asking the wrong question.

Philosopher and apologist Ravi Zacharias has made this statement a part of his ministry's mission:

What I believe in my heart must make sense in my mind.

He stated this idea quite succinctly in a forum at Harvard University. During an opportunity to interact with the audience, Zacharias was challeneged with the question, "Should one turn to Christianity because it helps me find happiness / contentment (or deal with pain)?"

His answer: "Absolutely not."

He went on to state,

If it is true, it will help you deal with the issue of pain and suffering. ... It is not true because it helps you deal with pain and suffering.

As an exercise, we can take Dr. Zacahrias' model for religion and apply it to the case of the mother in the song "Held":

Assuming Islam is true and the sovereign God is not good, bad or personal, then the grieving mother should be able to find comfort in a God who may or may not care about her pain but caused it nonetheless.

Assuming Buddhism is true, then the mother should be comforted to know that her child either died because of a sin they committed in a previous life or that she herself committed.

Finally, assuming Christianity is true, the comfort comes in knowing that God does not cause, desire, or take pleasure in her pain, nor does it's presence dimish His presence in her or her child's life, now and hereafter. The pain is not an end in and of itself.

Take your pick, but in my estimation, Dr. Zacharias is right - what I believe in my heart must make sense in my head. Emotion sentiment does not make truth. Rather, knowing the truth is what should determine how we feel.

Have a great week.

We're praying for you, Denny.