Contentment and the Thorn in the Flesh

I learned something new! While I hope I am always learning, this is different. This is one of those times when you learn something so simple, you wonder why you never knew it. And, it concerns the thorn in the flesh.

Contentment, means being willing to not only accept what God has given you for a situation, it means being at peace with it. I usually think of things like calling, gifting, equipping when I discuss contentment. I forgot the thorn in the flesh which Paul discusses at 2 Cor. 12:7.

I have had a muscular-skeletal thing in my chest off and on for years. (Distance runners who stop are great candidates for this, I found.) Anyway, it has flared up more on than off in the past two months. I went to the Dr., got some meds, and I find that I am so much more contented now. I am at peace.

But, what if the condition hadn't gone away? That's where Paul's discussion hits home. I need to add to my contentment bag of tools a tool that reminds me to deal with thorns in the flesh. The next one might not go away, and I want to ensure that I don't lose the peace. That shouldn't be hard, now that I have learned something new!

p.s. You young guys will discover that the "thorn" thing is more relevant as you pass the 40 mark!

What Does It Mean?

On the 15th, the 5th Circuit issued an opinion in Staley v. Harris County, Texas . The decision deals with whether or not a monument (which does look like a trash receptacle) is too religious in nature to stand in a courthouse area in Houston, TX. Based upon recent Supreme Court decisions, it looked like a slam dunk that the monument could stay. Even under older tests, it looked golden. It has to be removed.

Bad facts make bad law. That's where Judge John Devine, a Texas state court judge enters the picture. He is bad facts like Roy Moore is/was bad facts. Judge Devine restored the monument in 1995, about forty years after it had been built. He did it with fanfare and lots of talk about how he was putting Christianity into government. Frankly, his "style" was what I think caused the court to issue a bad law opinion. They didn't like Devine.

Certainly there is no excuse for their twisting the law to get at him. (Their decision reminded me of a 9th Circuit edict.) Still, did we have to give them the chance? What is worse, guys like Devine will argue that the ruling is even worse than it is. He and his buddies will argue that the Washington monument is coming down next. All that talk will set the stage where either an en banc ruling or a Supreme Court review will become an either or issue. Any court looking at this will get to choose from two bad choices; they can either affirm bad law or vindicate the hyper right. Things don't look too good.

When will we learn that appeals aren't won in the newspapers? Posturing looks good, affirms our commitment to Christ (no matter how stupid we look), but leads to a loss. The question isn't, do we want to win? The question is, do we want to sound pious? It shouldn't be that way. What does it mean?

Happy New Year!

In spite of the January 1st thing, and the various Jewish and Chinese dates, the new year starts when school starts. That is today for me, so Happy New Year! As always we are starting back with a spiritual theme. This year it is the danger of lying. The students will view Mark Twain's
"The Man That Corrupted Hadleyburg." Twain was quite an existentialist. It seems to me that he intentionally wrote Hadleyburg (which included a lying, loser pastor) and "The Mysterious Visitor" (with a misunderstood priest) to encourage folks to live in despair. I guess he figured that if he did, they should.

I sometimes think that existential authors are better "evangelists" for their cause than Christians are for theirs. We don't have to write happy endings to communicate world view. We just need to communicate truth. Why are so many authors with Christian convictions authors of fantasy? I don't know, just asking. Actually, it is good to start the new year asking questions.

What is Means and What is Ends?

Over here, on JJ Stellman's Blog there is a discussion of whether or not the church is created to be a transformational instrument in the world. (I'm sure JJ will clarify my assessment of his ongoing discussion.) Should there be a strict "two kingdom" separation between the cultic (church) and the culture (society and government)?

My question in all of this is what are we talking about? I think the idea is that JJ sees churches today seeking to be "missional" as the means to reach people. Perhaps he is arguing that our means are the means of grace, not the ministry of mercy, deed, etc.

OK. Maybe that is the case. But, shouldn't the ends (as opposed to means) of our lives as the church be transformational. I am not talking about how we are transformed, but how our culture is transformed by strong churches. Shouldn't people in a community be impacted by our presence, what we do and how we personally transform? Some should hate us. Others should love us. Some should come to Christ. Again, not because we see our kingdom work as a means to say, "Hey, look at us!" Instead, because we do intrude the Kingdom into their midst, the end of that should be a transformed world. Didn't Pliny say something about that?


While I have no use for churches that are "missional" because that is the cool thing to be, I see that all churches are called to be light. When it shines, things happen. We don't shine as a means to make things happen. The ends, as a result of our shining is that things happen.

Random Thoughts on Sabbathing

Last night I continued reading authors on the Sabbath. I finished the evening listening to Tim Keller's sermon on Luke 6. Before that I reviewed Dabney, Hoeksema, and others. My reading confirmed what I wrote years ago; there is little agreement out there not only on how to observe the Sabbath, but why we observe it.

Two things seem clear to me from Scripture. First, it a Sabbath to God (Ex. 20:10). Second, it was made for us (Mark 2:27). It is hard to rest from worldly concerns. It is hard to spend the whole day thinking about God and His love. I guess that shows how out of practice we are and how much we need one day in seven to help us. Most people spend time looking for Sabbath rules. It is much harder to simply experience a Sabbath.

It's Gonna Cost Me

I am in strong rebellion against things egalatarian. I confess, I see egalatarianism everywhere. It is like when you get a new car or truck and suddenly you notice your kind of car or truck everywhere. You never saw so many convertibles before! Well, that's how I am about egalatarianism. Now from Reuters comes the story that American women favor a plasma tv over a diamond solitare necklace by a 3 to 1 margin. They want the same thing the guys want.

So, the only logical way to respond, it seems to me, is go out, spend money and buy my wife something that is feminine. I mean something that no guy would buy for himself. No androgony here! At the same time I need to work to avoid the reality that most things I would consider (Victoria's Secret, etc.) are really for me!

Oh, what a difficult world we live in! May boys stay boys and girls stay girls. God's idea seems just right to me!

Considering Temptation

Mark Twain's The Man That Corrupted Hadleyburg is a chilling tale. It deals with a town that prides itself about its integrity. Turns out that when tempted, the integrity is veneer deep. With what James says about how temptation is not sin, but a precursor, I think I (we) would do well to give temptation more regard. If we could just have a converation with God, ourselves, or an advisor during a temptation, we might consider passing on the sin. If someone could have talked with Eve in the garden, she might have heard, "Come on, Eve. God has been good to us. He has never failed us. What do we really know about the snake in the tree? It seems to me he is being a snake in the grass and trying to ruin a good thing. Tell him to get lost." What a difference considering temptation makes!

Blogging Manners

I have noticed that many blogs are well done when it comes to grammar, spelling and style. On the other hand, it seems an equal number have adopted a grammar, spelling and style where anything goes. Ebonics used to be associated with undereducated folks from the poor side of town, at least until Oakland schools adopted it. We have reached a point where capitalization, which should be used to communicate truth, is gone. Punctuation, useful for more than clarifying the Eats Shoots and Leaves statement, has followed capitalization into the boonies. What is left is a contracted, ebonic like language of the electronically printed page. Before you LOL, consider that what we say in our blogs should communicate to those who may not be fluent in EE (electronic ebonics). So, be careful out there.