Not many people will take the time nor have the inclination to read the excellent book "Worship by the Book", D.A. Carson editor. So to share just one of the many blessings from this work, I thought I would duplicate a passage from the chapter "Worship Under the Word" by D.A. Carson himself. Carson is articulating some conclusions from his rather technical chapter in which he attempts to construct a brief theology of worship. In the chapter he demonstrates the true nature of worship in the New Testament, one aspect of which is that true New Testament worship is the life of faith. Worship is the Christian's expression of the greatest commandment to love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. Clearly this is far beyond what many think of as worship. Many restrict their view of worship to the weekly, corporate gathering of the Church in which congregational praise is offered to God. In fact, New Testament worship is the entire focus of the Christian's thoughts, heart, and actions. But, it certainly does include corporate, congregational worship! Read these strong words from Carson about the authenticity of true worship in the corporate, congregational context...ponder them and apply them:
"Hindrances to excellent corporate worship are of various sorts. For convenience, they may be broken into two kinds. On the one hand, corporate worship may be stultified by church members who never pray at home, who come to church waiting to be entertained, who are inwardly marking a scorecard instead of participating in worship, who love mere tradition (or mere innovation!) more than truth, who are so busy their minds are cluttered with the press of the urgent, who are nurturing secret bitterness and resentments in the dark recesses of their minds.
On the other hand, corporate worship may be poor primarily because of those who are leading...Some who publicly lead the corporate meetings of the people of God merely perform; others are engrossed in the worship of God. Some merely sing; some put on a great show of being involved; but others transparently worship God...their conduct is "transparent". The way they lead must in the first instance be marked by faithfulness to the Word of God: that is certainly observable, in particular to those who know their Bibles well. But the way they lead can be measured not only in terms of formal content but also in terms of heart attitudes that inevitably manifest themselves in talk, body language, focus, and style. Some pray with strings of evangelical clichés; some show off with orotund phrasings; others pray to God out of profound personal knowledge and bring the congregation along with them. Some preach without punch; others speak as if delivering the oracles of God.
What is at stake is authenticity...sooner or later Christians tire of public meetings that are profoundly inauthentic, regardless of how well (or poorly) arranged, directed, performed. We long to meet, corporately, with the living and majestic God and to offer Him the praise that is His due". (58-59 - bold and italics mine)
Showing posts with label church. Show all posts
Showing posts with label church. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Friday, January 22, 2010
Is Socialism More Christian?
More thoughtful Christians often ask, "what political or economic
system is more Christian"? Less thoughtful Christians (in the West at
least) often assume that democracy and/or capitalism is inherently more
Christian. Too often this is simply an assumption, meaning it is an idea they
hold without having critically analyzed it or feel analysis is not needed
because they think it is obviously true. But as Christians we must be
supremely concerned with truth because we worship and follow the One who claims
to be THE Truth (Jn 14:6). And today, more and more Christians are being challenged by a culture that is questioning the virtue of the American capitalistic system, a culture that now often suggests America is inherently unjust and racist partly due to its form of government and economic system.
This topic is exceedingly relevant today in 21st century because the political scene in the United States is one of upheaval and tension largely between two schools of political and economic thought. One school of thought is capitalism coupled with the belief that a smaller, less involved central government is most desirable. The other school of thought is socialism coupled with a belief that a larger, more involved central government is most desirable. The differences couldn't be more plain and profound between these schools of thought. While it is absolutely true that a Christian's (and therefore the Church's) primary concern should be the glory of God as seen in the face of Christ (2Cor 4:5-6) AND it is absolutely true that much damage has been done to the cause of Christ in America because too many Christians have forgotten this core concern and become much too focused on politics, it is also true that Christians must take their citizenship seriously (Rom 13:1-7). One way we glorify God is through our humble obedience to His word and His word clearly calls us to a stewardship of His earthly creation. One element of that creation is "the governing authorities". So we must take politics and questions such as capitalism vs socialism seriously but always remember it is never primary.
That said, what is the right answer? Is capitalism and democracy (vis a vi the United States) "more Christian" than socialism expressed through a large, controlling central government? Before we can answer that we need to establish some definitions - what is "capitalism" and what is "socialism"? While we could get very nuanced and embark on many pages simply to articulate a definition for each it will be more productive to give a commonly accepted, concise definition for each. The American Heritage dictionary does a good, fairly even handed job in providing such definitions. Here are the definitions as contained in the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language online version:
Capitalism: "An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market".
Socialism: 1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
Since the definition for socialism references communism it is helpful to include that definition as well:
Communism: 1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
2. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
3. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.
Again, we could go on and on giving more detailed and refined definitions especially in regard to how these theories have been expressed in particular historical contexts. But these are reasonably accurate and helpful definitions of the various terms. So which system is more Christian? Let's examine the definitions and then establish a biblical principle to guide us to our conclusion.
First, notice the key elements of each definition. For Capitalism we notice the term "privately" which could be also stated "individually" as in individual person (citizen). The definition mentions, "or corporately" in regards to ownership but private individuals or group of individuals comprise the corporation. The point here is one of private ownership *not* government or collective ownership. Thus the rewards of economic production are returned to the individuals proportionate to their level of investment of time, energy, money etc. The economic rewards (wealth or profit) are not returned to a central government representing the entire collective of people to then be distributed back on an "equal" basis. The theory states that if "Bob Smith" works harder, invests more time, energy, money and more risk, he will get more reward than John Doe who chose not to work as hard or risk as much. In capitalism the emphasis is clearly on private ownership therefore on the individual. The individual or private citizen is primary over the state or collective (central government) in a fundamental way. This is why capitalism is typically coupled with a political system such as democracy or a representative republic as in the United States, because such political systems also emphasize individual rights and liberties over and above the state or central government.
As for Socialism (and we will consider Communism together with Socialism) notice the terms, "collectively" and "centralized government". These terms indicate the emphasis of socialism and communism. The essence of socialism is the collective ownership of all means for producing and distributing goods. The idea is that it is best for everyone if private or individual ownership is given up in favor of a collective or communal ownership. Of course there must be some mechanism for overseeing the collective ownership, production and distribution back out to the people so a strong central government must be in place. In a socialistic and communistic environment a strong centralized government owns everything and allocates back to the citizenry the goods and services deemed appropriate. This is why socialism is often coupled with dictatorships or very strong, authoritarian central governments often referred to as "the state". In this system "the state" takes precedence over the individual and all things belong to the state and not to the individual. The state is the highest virtue, especially in Communism, and claims ownership of all goods and services to the point that children are even considered owned by the state as a "resource" for the common good of the state.
Now to answer our original question, what system is more Christian - socialism and its attending political manifestations or capitalism and its attending manifestations? I believe the biblical answer is that capitalism and its attending political manifestations are inherently more Christian...if by that we mean that it inherently creates an environment in which Christianity is more appreciated and supported and its character is more consistent with Christian principles but we do *not* mean that it is specially ordained of God. But such a conclusion must be defended and substantiated by scripture.
The primary biblical defense for the above conclusion (that capitalism, and its attending political systems, is inherently more Christian) derives from the fundamental creation theology that humans are created in the image of God and are commissioned by God to be His stewards of the earth (Gen 1:26-30). This in fact is the fundamental principle that we see worked out in the founding documents of the United States of America. The assertion that all men (people) are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights derives from the fundamental truth that God creates each human in His image. Therefore, the individual person is precious and immensely valuable. He or she is immensely valuable *not* because of personal economic or social standing, *not* because of potential for productivity, *not* because the state deems him or her so, but strictly *because* he or she reflects the glory of God. God is the greatest treasure and mankind is the greatest element of creation reflecting the glory of that treasure. Therefore, the individual must be esteemed, respected, protected and supported - thus the inalienable rights flow from the fact that we are His image bearers therefore flowing from God Himself. These rights are *not* given by the state therefore cannot be taken away by the state.
The implications of this truth are profound and provide the defense for the assertion that capitalism and its attending political systems is more Christian. The generalization can be stated like this: any economic and political system that esteems, protects, and supports the individual and his/her free pursuit of fulfilling God's stewardship mandate (Gen 1:28-30) is to be preferred. The Founding Fathers of the United States referred to it as a "more perfect union". It was their desire and endeavor to strive for that more perfect union based on the foundational truth that we are all created by God in His image and therefore have rights that cannot be denied by the state to pursue our "happiness" (18th century language indicating our meaningful stewardship of life). Economic freedom is critical to that pursuit and essential to the realization of a more perfect union. Political freedom is also essential. The two work hand in hand and that's why capitalism is typically attended by a form of political government that encourages freedom for the individual. Inherently (and this is validated by history) socialism leads to the suppression and repression of the individual and his/her rights to the free pursuit of earthly stewardship.
America chose capitalism and a constitutional form of a representative republic in order to secure the "more perfect union" as the environment in and through which our God-given call to glorify Him could be expressed. I believe, based on the reasons above, this American system is a "more perfect" union to that end and therefore "more Christian". No, it is not perfect. No, our form of government is not specially anointed by God. And no, the Church should *not* throw its focus and resources at political solutions to our national and social ills. But, we should recognize the truth. There is a difference between capitalism and socialism, between a constitutional republic and communism with its attending authoritative central government. From a Christian perspective one is certainly better than the other. Capitalism and our representative government is to be preferred over socialism so we can more freely and completely reflect the glory of our Lord. If we lose our economic system and our representative government we will have lost something valuable. However, (and this is *massively* important) we will *never* lose the power and ability to glorify our great God and savior Jesus Christ. The Church is built on the rock of that confession and the gates of hell cannot prevail or stand against it (Mat 16:18). No matter the form of government or economic system the Church has one primary mission and the infinite power to complete it - Glorify Him! (Eph 1:5-6)
Nevertheless, be informed, pursue the truth, speak and vote in support of what is inherently more Christian!
This topic is exceedingly relevant today in 21st century because the political scene in the United States is one of upheaval and tension largely between two schools of political and economic thought. One school of thought is capitalism coupled with the belief that a smaller, less involved central government is most desirable. The other school of thought is socialism coupled with a belief that a larger, more involved central government is most desirable. The differences couldn't be more plain and profound between these schools of thought. While it is absolutely true that a Christian's (and therefore the Church's) primary concern should be the glory of God as seen in the face of Christ (2Cor 4:5-6) AND it is absolutely true that much damage has been done to the cause of Christ in America because too many Christians have forgotten this core concern and become much too focused on politics, it is also true that Christians must take their citizenship seriously (Rom 13:1-7). One way we glorify God is through our humble obedience to His word and His word clearly calls us to a stewardship of His earthly creation. One element of that creation is "the governing authorities". So we must take politics and questions such as capitalism vs socialism seriously but always remember it is never primary.
That said, what is the right answer? Is capitalism and democracy (vis a vi the United States) "more Christian" than socialism expressed through a large, controlling central government? Before we can answer that we need to establish some definitions - what is "capitalism" and what is "socialism"? While we could get very nuanced and embark on many pages simply to articulate a definition for each it will be more productive to give a commonly accepted, concise definition for each. The American Heritage dictionary does a good, fairly even handed job in providing such definitions. Here are the definitions as contained in the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language online version:
Capitalism: "An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market".
Socialism: 1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
Since the definition for socialism references communism it is helpful to include that definition as well:
Communism: 1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
2. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
3. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.
Again, we could go on and on giving more detailed and refined definitions especially in regard to how these theories have been expressed in particular historical contexts. But these are reasonably accurate and helpful definitions of the various terms. So which system is more Christian? Let's examine the definitions and then establish a biblical principle to guide us to our conclusion.
First, notice the key elements of each definition. For Capitalism we notice the term "privately" which could be also stated "individually" as in individual person (citizen). The definition mentions, "or corporately" in regards to ownership but private individuals or group of individuals comprise the corporation. The point here is one of private ownership *not* government or collective ownership. Thus the rewards of economic production are returned to the individuals proportionate to their level of investment of time, energy, money etc. The economic rewards (wealth or profit) are not returned to a central government representing the entire collective of people to then be distributed back on an "equal" basis. The theory states that if "Bob Smith" works harder, invests more time, energy, money and more risk, he will get more reward than John Doe who chose not to work as hard or risk as much. In capitalism the emphasis is clearly on private ownership therefore on the individual. The individual or private citizen is primary over the state or collective (central government) in a fundamental way. This is why capitalism is typically coupled with a political system such as democracy or a representative republic as in the United States, because such political systems also emphasize individual rights and liberties over and above the state or central government.
As for Socialism (and we will consider Communism together with Socialism) notice the terms, "collectively" and "centralized government". These terms indicate the emphasis of socialism and communism. The essence of socialism is the collective ownership of all means for producing and distributing goods. The idea is that it is best for everyone if private or individual ownership is given up in favor of a collective or communal ownership. Of course there must be some mechanism for overseeing the collective ownership, production and distribution back out to the people so a strong central government must be in place. In a socialistic and communistic environment a strong centralized government owns everything and allocates back to the citizenry the goods and services deemed appropriate. This is why socialism is often coupled with dictatorships or very strong, authoritarian central governments often referred to as "the state". In this system "the state" takes precedence over the individual and all things belong to the state and not to the individual. The state is the highest virtue, especially in Communism, and claims ownership of all goods and services to the point that children are even considered owned by the state as a "resource" for the common good of the state.
Now to answer our original question, what system is more Christian - socialism and its attending political manifestations or capitalism and its attending manifestations? I believe the biblical answer is that capitalism and its attending political manifestations are inherently more Christian...if by that we mean that it inherently creates an environment in which Christianity is more appreciated and supported and its character is more consistent with Christian principles but we do *not* mean that it is specially ordained of God. But such a conclusion must be defended and substantiated by scripture.
The primary biblical defense for the above conclusion (that capitalism, and its attending political systems, is inherently more Christian) derives from the fundamental creation theology that humans are created in the image of God and are commissioned by God to be His stewards of the earth (Gen 1:26-30). This in fact is the fundamental principle that we see worked out in the founding documents of the United States of America. The assertion that all men (people) are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights derives from the fundamental truth that God creates each human in His image. Therefore, the individual person is precious and immensely valuable. He or she is immensely valuable *not* because of personal economic or social standing, *not* because of potential for productivity, *not* because the state deems him or her so, but strictly *because* he or she reflects the glory of God. God is the greatest treasure and mankind is the greatest element of creation reflecting the glory of that treasure. Therefore, the individual must be esteemed, respected, protected and supported - thus the inalienable rights flow from the fact that we are His image bearers therefore flowing from God Himself. These rights are *not* given by the state therefore cannot be taken away by the state.
The implications of this truth are profound and provide the defense for the assertion that capitalism and its attending political systems is more Christian. The generalization can be stated like this: any economic and political system that esteems, protects, and supports the individual and his/her free pursuit of fulfilling God's stewardship mandate (Gen 1:28-30) is to be preferred. The Founding Fathers of the United States referred to it as a "more perfect union". It was their desire and endeavor to strive for that more perfect union based on the foundational truth that we are all created by God in His image and therefore have rights that cannot be denied by the state to pursue our "happiness" (18th century language indicating our meaningful stewardship of life). Economic freedom is critical to that pursuit and essential to the realization of a more perfect union. Political freedom is also essential. The two work hand in hand and that's why capitalism is typically attended by a form of political government that encourages freedom for the individual. Inherently (and this is validated by history) socialism leads to the suppression and repression of the individual and his/her rights to the free pursuit of earthly stewardship.
America chose capitalism and a constitutional form of a representative republic in order to secure the "more perfect union" as the environment in and through which our God-given call to glorify Him could be expressed. I believe, based on the reasons above, this American system is a "more perfect" union to that end and therefore "more Christian". No, it is not perfect. No, our form of government is not specially anointed by God. And no, the Church should *not* throw its focus and resources at political solutions to our national and social ills. But, we should recognize the truth. There is a difference between capitalism and socialism, between a constitutional republic and communism with its attending authoritative central government. From a Christian perspective one is certainly better than the other. Capitalism and our representative government is to be preferred over socialism so we can more freely and completely reflect the glory of our Lord. If we lose our economic system and our representative government we will have lost something valuable. However, (and this is *massively* important) we will *never* lose the power and ability to glorify our great God and savior Jesus Christ. The Church is built on the rock of that confession and the gates of hell cannot prevail or stand against it (Mat 16:18). No matter the form of government or economic system the Church has one primary mission and the infinite power to complete it - Glorify Him! (Eph 1:5-6)
Nevertheless, be informed, pursue the truth, speak and vote in support of what is inherently more Christian!
Friday, September 4, 2009
Oh not to receive the grace of God in vain
What does Paul mean in 2Cor 6:1? Some things I think we can conclude: One, he is talking to the church, albeit the Corinthian church. He is talking to professing Christians so it must be that people who profess to be Christians can be in danger of receiving the grace of God in vain. Secondly, receiving the grace of God IN VAIN actually negates the grace of God. In other words, if someone receives God's grace in vain that means they did so in an empty, meaningless, powerless way so really that person did not truly receive the grace of God. That's why I say Paul was addressing PROFESSING Christians. He certainly was addressing the entire Corinthian church (2Cor 1:1) so, the third thing to note, is that it must be true a church can have a mixture of people who have truly received the grace of God (in power) and those who have "received" it in vain. Fourthly, one evidence of having received the grace of God in vain is that you don't separate yourself from the world (2Cor 6:14-7:1). That was how some of the Corinthians were demonstrating it so Paul warned them and pleaded with them in 6:1 to not be ones who receives the grace of God in vain. Some were apparently claiming the name of Christian but also maintaining their relationships, ties, activities and behaviors they had as non-Christians. They looked and acted just like pagans/unbelievers.
What a challenge to all who name the name of Christ! "Come out from among them" the Lord says. Paul challenged the Corinthians to examine themselves to see if they be in the faith (2Cor 13:5). We must do the same. If we wish to follow Christ and fellowship with Him we cannot follow and fellowship with "the world" or with sin. Oh Lord, change my heart and keep it tender and repentant so that I will not be one who received Your grace in vain!
What a challenge to all who name the name of Christ! "Come out from among them" the Lord says. Paul challenged the Corinthians to examine themselves to see if they be in the faith (2Cor 13:5). We must do the same. If we wish to follow Christ and fellowship with Him we cannot follow and fellowship with "the world" or with sin. Oh Lord, change my heart and keep it tender and repentant so that I will not be one who received Your grace in vain!
Monday, July 20, 2009
Bored with God
It is no wonder that our children grow to be bored with church. In fact most adults are bored with God in general. This past Sunday morning as I held my grandson during the praise part of worship this sad reality struck me and I pondered it throughout the day.
The reason I think this sad state exists is because we don't practice Deuteronomy 6:1-9 when we take our children to the amusement park! Let me explain what I mean. When we gather together as the Church we do so to worship our great and glorious God through Jesus Christ our Lord by the power of His Spirit. There SHOULD be nothing more glorious and joyful and powerful than that. But all too often too many people (and certainly children are in this group) are bored. Why? Is it because we need to have more contemporary and livelier music? Do we need to have children-centric services that include fun activities for kids and bring the messages down to their level? Do we need to include multi-media into our services to make them more entertaining? While all of these things are not necessarily bad ideas they do not address the real problem. The real problem is that we are not in love with God!
We start early teaching our children to be in love with the gifts that God gives and sadly do not make a point to teach them to be in love with God Himself. We teach them to love and enjoy the gifts but not to love and enjoy the Giver! But if we study and believe scripture we will not let this happen. The scriptures teach us that, "The heavens declare His glory..." (Ps 19) and that all good gifts come from Him (Matthew 7:11) and He has prepared for us an unimaginably glorious inheritance (Ephesians 1:18). God owns all that is and created this world for us to enjoy (Ps 50:8-15, Acts 17:24-31). So what is greater, the gift or the One who made the gift and gives the gift in love? Clearly the giver is greater than the gift!
By nature humans (beginning from childhood) do not see this. From eyes of profound self-centeredness they do not appropriately love and appreciate the giver. Just watch children at Christmas! The gift becomes the object of our love and devotion and especially in God's case we refuse to give Him due credit for His goodness (Romans 1:18-21). When we take our children to the amusement park, or the rodeo, or give them a bicycle, they naturally fall in love with the gift. We're "lucky" if they give US due credit for the gift. But most importantly they should give credit and thanks to the ONE who is ultimately responsible for the gift and that's God. It is the parent's job to teach them this crucial truth and behavior. By following Deuteronomy 6:1-9 we can do our part to connect the dots for our children. When we go to that amusement park, or that birthday party, or grandma and grandpa's for Christmas we must point out to them that God is the gracious and loving giver of all good things. We must explain it, point it out, answer questions and clarify for them the ultimate truth behind the apparent truth. The apparent truth is that Mom and Dad are responsible (or worse Santa!) and to a point Mom and Dad are responsible...but only at a surface level. The deeper truth crucial for them to see and necessary for them to know in order to develop a love and thankfulness toward God, is that God is the ultimate giver! And He deserves the credit so that His beauty and goodness are exalted!
Then, when they gather with the church to express love and adoration to God, they will get it! "Ah, yes...I am praising, thanking and adoring the One who gives me all these good and perfect gifts (James 1:17); I really like and enjoy those gifts but I LOVE the Giver and want to know Him more; I will worship Him for His goodness and gracious love to His people"!
This is how we conquer boredom with God.
The reason I think this sad state exists is because we don't practice Deuteronomy 6:1-9 when we take our children to the amusement park! Let me explain what I mean. When we gather together as the Church we do so to worship our great and glorious God through Jesus Christ our Lord by the power of His Spirit. There SHOULD be nothing more glorious and joyful and powerful than that. But all too often too many people (and certainly children are in this group) are bored. Why? Is it because we need to have more contemporary and livelier music? Do we need to have children-centric services that include fun activities for kids and bring the messages down to their level? Do we need to include multi-media into our services to make them more entertaining? While all of these things are not necessarily bad ideas they do not address the real problem. The real problem is that we are not in love with God!
We start early teaching our children to be in love with the gifts that God gives and sadly do not make a point to teach them to be in love with God Himself. We teach them to love and enjoy the gifts but not to love and enjoy the Giver! But if we study and believe scripture we will not let this happen. The scriptures teach us that, "The heavens declare His glory..." (Ps 19) and that all good gifts come from Him (Matthew 7:11) and He has prepared for us an unimaginably glorious inheritance (Ephesians 1:18). God owns all that is and created this world for us to enjoy (Ps 50:8-15, Acts 17:24-31). So what is greater, the gift or the One who made the gift and gives the gift in love? Clearly the giver is greater than the gift!
By nature humans (beginning from childhood) do not see this. From eyes of profound self-centeredness they do not appropriately love and appreciate the giver. Just watch children at Christmas! The gift becomes the object of our love and devotion and especially in God's case we refuse to give Him due credit for His goodness (Romans 1:18-21). When we take our children to the amusement park, or the rodeo, or give them a bicycle, they naturally fall in love with the gift. We're "lucky" if they give US due credit for the gift. But most importantly they should give credit and thanks to the ONE who is ultimately responsible for the gift and that's God. It is the parent's job to teach them this crucial truth and behavior. By following Deuteronomy 6:1-9 we can do our part to connect the dots for our children. When we go to that amusement park, or that birthday party, or grandma and grandpa's for Christmas we must point out to them that God is the gracious and loving giver of all good things. We must explain it, point it out, answer questions and clarify for them the ultimate truth behind the apparent truth. The apparent truth is that Mom and Dad are responsible (or worse Santa!) and to a point Mom and Dad are responsible...but only at a surface level. The deeper truth crucial for them to see and necessary for them to know in order to develop a love and thankfulness toward God, is that God is the ultimate giver! And He deserves the credit so that His beauty and goodness are exalted!
Then, when they gather with the church to express love and adoration to God, they will get it! "Ah, yes...I am praising, thanking and adoring the One who gives me all these good and perfect gifts (James 1:17); I really like and enjoy those gifts but I LOVE the Giver and want to know Him more; I will worship Him for His goodness and gracious love to His people"!
This is how we conquer boredom with God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)