Uri Brito

On April 22, 2014 By Uri Brito In Theology Like

Five Lessons I (Re)Learned in Lent

Easter Season is here! Christ is risen! He is risen indeed!

Easter came with all the glory expected. Every year it just seems more and more meaningful. But as I am slowly immersing into the season of abundant joy, I ask myself what to do with the season that is now behind us, namely Lent?

The 40 days of Lent ^a provided some genuine times of reflection, introspection, and renewal. The Season went by faster than I anticipated, but it left a profound mark in my life. There are five lessons I thought I’d share as I enter the Easter Season with a tremendous appetite to see Christ exalted in everything I do.

First, I learned that Lent is needed. We tend to think that we can meditate on everything without any order or sequence. We simply can’t. God loves time. He gave it to us. He knows we need to be structured as human beings, and He gave the Church wisdom to help us structure our meditations and concerns. To do so, He gave us Jesus. Jesus is with us all year long as we live, move, and have our being in Him through Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, and Pentecost (Trinity). We need not just Christ, but His entire life lived, crucified, and raised. Consistent meditation on one theme over the others causes misdirection in affection and the Christian experience.

Second, I learned that Lent is for loving. We live for others. We live for the community. We follow the Head, and following Him means serving the body. Lent is for going the extra mile in service and charity.

Third, Lent is for dying. Life is structured as a death/resurrection pattern. We all enjoy the latter motif, but we find the dying part to be a bit outrageous. Perhaps our expectations need to be re-shaped. Lent is for dying to self. It’s for taking up the cross. It’s for weeping with those who weep. Lent is the realization that the joy of living is dying, so that others may live.

Fourth, Lent is imprecation. In Lent we learn that God has enemies. In Lent we pray that God would act justly upon those who humiliate, abuse, torture, and murder the innocent. I learned that imprecation is the most powerful response to such cowards. In Lent I learned that God’s justice is always perfect and His acts always timely.

Finally, during Lent I learned that I do not love the cross as I ought. I learned that crucifixion and death are still too foreign to my way of thinking. I learned that the death of Jesus continues to have serious consequences for the way I live my life.

Through Lent, I learned that I needed Easter and that Easter needs Lent.<>

also known as Quadragesima (back)

On April 17, 2014 By Uri Brito In Theology Like

What is Maundy Thursday?

Holy Week is inaugurated on Palm Sunday, the Sunday before Easter Sunday. Palm Sunday is the unfolding drama of Jesus’ last week before his death. As the King enters into Jerusalem to inspect his holy city, received by a multitude of rejoicers, he discovers that the city is corrupt (Zec. 9). As the week continues, Jesus enters into a host of confrontations with the religious leaders of the day, which caused them to detest the Paschal Lamb, and ultimately crucify Him.

The events of Maundy Thursday are powerful events in the life of the Christian Church. The name “Maundy Thursday” is derived from the Latin word mandatum meaning “commandment.” In John 13 :31-35, Jesus tells his disciples that he has a new commandment, that you love one another. Obeying this commandment serves as the way the world will recognize the children of God.

Another element of Maundy Thursday is the administration of the Eucharist. Maundy Thursday describes the disciples’ Last Supper with their Lord. It was during that meal that Judas was identified as the one who betrayed our Lord. Judas’ kissing the Son of Man was the confirmation that he himself had become the son of perdition. His betrayal by a kiss is indicative of his all-consuming hatred for the message of Jesus. Judas, who partook of Christ at the Last Supper, now partook of Christ’s body by the kiss of death.

Maundy Thursday is a service of love and gratitude. On this day, the people of God join others to renew their love for one another, and to renew their commitment to our Lord as we eat his flesh and drink his blood. By this they will know that we are His disciples.<>mobil game

On April 9, 2014 By Uri Brito In Scribblings Like

Lectures on Dietrich Bonhoeffer (February 4, 1906 – April 9, 1945)

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German Lutheran pastor, theologian, dissident anti-Nazi, and founding member of the Confessing Church. He died on April 9, 1945. I did a talk some months ago summarizing Bonhoeffer’s excellent book Life Together. Here is my conclusion:

Bonhoeffer was hanged less than a month before he would have been liberated by allied forces. He never for a moment believed that the world needed to be given over to evil. He believed in the redemption of this world, and he also believed that the Gospel called us to speak into all issues of life. When Christians retreat from the public square we are leaving room for another Hitler to rise. “The Christian faith,” he said, “could never be really intellectual theory…but a responsible, obedient action, the discipleship of Christ in every situation of concrete everyday life in private or in public.” Bonhoeffer believed that life together was a necessary testament to the Gospel. It was a taste of our life together in the resurrected world. This is why for him, death was not the end. One of the English officers described his last encounter with Dietrich Bonhoeffer:

Bonhoeffer was one of the very few persons I have ever met for whom God was real and always near….he had hardly ended his last prayer when the door opened and two civilians entered. They said: “Prisoner Bonhoeffer, come with us.” That had only one meaning for all prisoners—the gallows. We said good-by to him. He took me aside: “This is the end, but for me it is the beginning of life.”

Life Together now does not end at death. At that moment, it will be only the beginning of a much richer and purer life with one another.

As a way of celebrating the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer who died on April 9, 1945, Wordmp3.com is offering four lectures on Bonhoeffer presented at the ETS National Conference for $9.99. E-mail me at wordmp3sales@gmail.com to receive the $3 DISCOUNT.<>

On March 31, 2014 By Uri Brito In Culture, Film Like

Christian Reviews of the Noah Movie

I have not seen the movie, but have read countless reviews. What follows are statements from five Christian thinkers about the movie:

Cal Beisner:

I saw Darren Aronofsky’s NOAH yesterday and actually enjoyed it. It was far less bad than I anticipated and in some respects was quite good. Its environmentalist message was muted from what one expected from the first script–still there, but not dominant. It (mostly) “gets” the sinfulness of man and the justice of God that responds in righteous wrath. It doesn’t get God’s mercy and grace or the way Noah and the flood and its aftermath presaged the person and atoning work of Christ. It pretty poignantly portrays the difficulties of a walk of faith and obedience to God, but because in it God Himself never speaks, it misses the real foundation of that faith–propositional revelation from the God who speaks and shows (to adopt the title of Carl F. H. Henry’s magnum opus).

Gregory Alan Thornbury:

In sum, Noah contains numerous plot points, devices, and characters that film critics can and will judge and critique. Over the years, I have taught philosophy of film in a number of educational and institutional settings. I have always had my students study Aronofksy, and I believe that this film, which he has said he wanted to be among his first, is a worthy addition to the body of his work. It is strikingly different, in important ways, from his previous films. For me, I found nothing more arresting and hopeless than the final scene of The Wrestler. In Noah, Aronofsky and Handel are wrestling with a different subject matter: theology. Their film will, I think, provoke heated biblical and theological conversations in restaurants and coffee shops after patrons see it. Christians might find it helpful to go see the film with people they know who have a lot of questions.

Steve Deace:

I even tried to watch it through the eyes of an unbeliever to find something redemptive about it, and I could not. For the life of me I cannot figure out why some people whose opinions I respect are endorsing this movie under any circumstances. Endorsing this movie is like our church fathers endorsing false Gnostic “gospels” because “even though they’re a total bastardization of the truth at least they’re a conversation starter.” Instead, our church fathers responded by writing works like Against Heresies to confront such lies. But I guess they just weren’t as enlightened or interested in cultural engagement as we are.

If the movie has a core message it’s that man is wicked but so is God, and God will actually bless our disobedience once we figure that out. It turns out the only truth Aronofsky told was when he said his Noah was “the least Biblical movie ever made.”

Brian Godawa:

Turning the tale of Noah into an environmentalist screed and animal rights diatribe does violence to the Biblical meaning and turns it into something entirely alien to the original meaning of the text. Admittedly, the script does include murder and violence against man as an additional “evil,” but this is secondary in the story. The primary sin of the script Noah is man’s violence against the environment. Which is kind of contradictory, don’t you think? Claiming that God destroys the entire environment because man was — well, destroying the environment?

Matt Walsh:

As a film, it’s like the script for a Syfy Network miniseries got shoved into a blender with the treatment for a Lifetime channel made-for-TV movie and then mixed with enough moping nihilism and environmentalist sermonizing to fool pretentious elitists into using words like ‘daring’ and ‘relevant’ when describing it. In other words, it’s aggressively abysmal.

But, as a money-making ploy, it’s a downright masterpiece.

<>online game

On March 25, 2014 By Uri Brito In Culture, Family and Children Like

It’s a Selfie World Out There!

“A selfie is a type of self-portrait photograph, typically taken with a hand-held digital camera or camera phone.” ^a

It’s a selfie world out there. Instagram has enriched itself with millions self-portraits. Justin Bieber may have popularized it, if one dares give him original credit for anything, but it’s now a world-wide phenomenon. Amateur photographers hold in their hand the perfect camera. Change the camera to self with a simple touch, smile, and post!

I am not interested in going on an anti-selfie campaign. People are creative. They are made after a creative God. Sometimes selfies incorporate a level of art that is truly remarkable. God likes to showcase his creation. And so at times showcasing a picture of ourselves to the world is not necessarily harmful. Sometimes it is can be humorous. Sometimes it is pathetic. Sometimes one does not know what to think.

When mom takes a picture of her pregnant belly, I see life. When a young lady takes a picture of herself with her new engagement ring, I see joy. When a guy takes a picture showcasing his new pair of athletic shoes he worked hard to earn, I say, “kudos.” Now, when young ladies begin to display their body parts that are meant to be displayed only to their future or current husbands, I say, “what in the world are you thinking!” When a young boy takes 15 pictures a day of himself in every imaginable pose, I say, “where’s your father?”

So, yes. Selfies can be great. And they can also be remarkable testaments to a pathetically self-serving and self-glorifying culture.

And then there are people who take selfies to a whole new level.

Well, for most people, that compulsion is relatively harmless, but for 19-year-old Danny Bowman, it reportedly led to an attempted suicide.

The British teen spent up to 10 hours each day taking photos of himself on his iPhone, the Daily Mirror reports. The addiction became so debilitating that he dropped out of school and retreated into his home for six months.

“I was constantly in search of taking the perfect selfie and, when I realized I couldn’t, I wanted to die,” Bowman told the Daily Mirror. “I lost my friends, my education, my health and almost my life.” ^b

It’s a selfie world. It’s a world where self-promotion and an unquenchable desire to find meaning finds a little bit of satisfaction in a selfie; a temporary satisfaction that cannot be quenched, and the search for more satisfaction ensues until one realizes that meaning is simply not possible.

So, a few thoughts to the selfie culture–especially those in the church.

First, always examine the purpose of your selfie. What am I trying to represent to the world about the God I worship? Owning things is not sinful. But the central issue has to do with the role you place on these things in your life.

What is this selfie communicating to the possibly hundreds or thousands of people who will eventually come across this picture? Why do I think that a certain part of my body needs to be seen by others; some that I never met personally, and others that I will see tomorrow in class?

Second, by all means don’t read this as crusade against selfies. Take them. But take them to show the world how beautiful we become when we are in Christ. “Look at me. You see my joy in my new tie? If you know me you know that I treasure deeply the God who gave me this tie.”

Third, take fewer selfies. Period.

Fourth, when in doubt about the potential consequences about a selfie in a certain a pose or wearing a certain outfit, don’t post it. Keep it as private reminder of your self-restraint.

Finally, let’s turn a little of our attention from self-portraits to familial portraits. You know what the world knows little about: familial happiness. The abortion rate and the growing trend of unbiblical divorces continue to rise. Talk about an ugly selfie! We have in our society a pitiful view of what joyful family life is like. Use your camera–a great gift from God, by the way–to honor others. Put pictures of your brother or sister accomplishing something. Show the world that your life is not just centered around yourself, but on others also.

So, don’t give up your selfies. I will add a little Instagram heart to them when I see them. But for every selfie you take, make sure to take three non-selfies. And then show the world that the world of me is also about you.

<>racer game online

Wikipedia definition (back)
See full article: http://time.com/35701/selfie-addict-attempts-suicide/ (back)

On March 20, 2014 By Uri Brito In Culture, Politics Like

What can we learn from the death of Fred Phelps?

By Uri Brito

The incendiary founder of Westboro Baptist has died.

World reports:

Fred Phelps Sr., the founder of a Kansas sect known for its anti-homosexuality picketing at military funerals, has died. He was 84.

The former figurehead of Westboro Baptist Church was hospice-bound in Topeka, Kan., and had stopped eating and drinking at the time of his death on Wednesday night, his estranged son Nathan told the Associated Press on Sunday. Nathan Phelps said a new board of eight elders excommunicated his father last summer after a power struggle, possibly contributing to the decline in his health. “I’m not sure how I feel about this,” he wrote on Facebook. “Terribly ironic that his devotion to his god ends this way. Destroyed by the monster he made.” Nathan Phelps left the sect 37 years ago and is now a religious skeptic and gay-rights advocate.

Phelps’ Westboro Baptist–an unaffiliated church–will now be left in the hands of other family members who will most likely continue the vision of their leader. A documentary was produced of the small Kansas congregation.

So, what can we learn from the death of Fred Phelps?

First, we learn that truth can be easily mis-applied. Phelps once noted that, “you preach the Bible without preaching the hatred of God.” Any sober-minded interpreter will attest to the Scriptural God who condemns sin and acts justly against sin. Any sober-minded interpreter will realize that the Marcionite heresy of dividing the Old Testament God from the New is not an orthodox option. The same God who destroyed and killed evil societies also judged his own people. That same God promises everlasting judgment upon those who do not believe in his Son (John 3:36). But this God of vengeance (Psalm 94) is also a God of everlasting love (Psalm 36:7). To overemphasize his wrath and to build one’s entire ministry around the wrath of God is to offer an unbalanced picture of the God of the Bible.

Further, it must be emphasized that the God of the Bible stressed mercy before judgment. Our God is an all consuming grace before He is an all consuming fire. Jesus offered himself to the people of Israel in mercy before he came and destroyed Jerusalem (Mat. 23:37). Phelps emphasized the wrath of God, but that message obscured the mercy and grace of God toward sinners (I Peter 3:15).

Second, we learn that angering the leftists is not always in our best interest. The Left hated Phelps and his group. “The Westboro Baptist Church is probably the vilest hate group in the United the State of America,” Heidi Beirich, research director for the Montgomery, Ala.-based Southern Poverty Law Center, told The Associated Press in July 2011. Indeed those who are in darkness will despise the witness of the light, but sometimes we who are light can portray a dim light immersed in unfruitful activities in the name of the Gospel. Yes, they will persecute us, but let us be wise to not pursue unnecessary persecution. The Gospel itself is enough to gain enemies. Let us not then debase its purity by bringing evangelicals and God-haters together against a common cause.

Third, we learn that picketing at homosexual and military funerals is not the way of the Gospel, but it is a way of death itself. Though we may vehemently disagree on matters of foreign policy, military soldiers and their families have the right to grieve. Grieving is a necessary means of emotional and physical relief. Though we oppose homosexuality and the practice of it on biblical grounds, even homosexuals have the right–as image-bearers–to grieve for their loved ones. To not allow them to weep is to de-humanize men and women created in the image of God. Instead of picketing and protesting at funerals, Christians need to establish a vision of marital faithfulness that is compelling to those who have rejected the agenda of God for man and woman. By picketing and protesting, the Phelps clan left a poor example of Christian compassion rooted in the imago dei. We must oppose the homosexual agenda at all costs, but we must proclaim truth winsomely and holistically, realizing that we are dealing with fellow human beings created in the image of God.

Fourth, we learn that independent groups like Westboro Baptist suffer from a severe lack of accountability. This individualized ecclesiology leaves no room for correction. They are the end all of theological decisions. We need a catholic vision that allows the local church to be held accountable to and connected with other congregations. This does not necessarily require a formal connection–as I would propose–but even an informal one where there would be genuine opportunities to exhort and challenge others to godly practices.

Finally, we learn that the legacy we leave is fundamental to our vision as Christians. How will our children remember us? Will they remember a contentious father who viewed evangelism as a means to de-humanize others–however different their moral agenda was? Or will they view us as lovers of truth who practiced truth in love; rebuking and exhorting; calling evil, evil, but winsomely engaging those outside of the covenant with the message of hope and communicating salvation as a restoration of the whole cosmos? Calling homosexuals to repentance while guiding and shepherding them in the process?

The agenda of Fred Phelps failed to communicate what the Bible intends to communicate about the nature of God. His tactics brought great harm to the cause of Christ. Many–even in his own family who have fled–have been negatively affected by this cult-like group^a. Phelps’ death reminds us that the way you live and present the Gospel matters, and that your zeal for truth can actually work against truth itself.

<>разместить на google

According to World: ” The couple had 13 adult children, nine of whom remain in the church and four of whom have left the church, according to the Topeka Capital-Journal. Roughly 20 of the couple’s 54 grandchildren also have left the church.” (back)

On March 19, 2014 By Uri Brito In Culture Like

Scott Walker quotes a Bible verse and the atheists are furious

By Uri Brito

Governor Scott Walker dared quote a bible reference on twitter. For many evangelicals, the brief reference to Philippians 4:13 is common Christian talk. “I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength.” Those familiar words carry great weight to evangelicals. We have all been taught from early on to trust in Christ and persevere while doing so. The problem is Scott Walker is an elected official. And the Freedom from Religious Foundation knows it and wants him to do something about it. To be precise, they want him to delete his tweet. That’s right. In their own words:

… To say “I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me,” seems more like a threat, or the utterance of a theocratic dictator, than of a duly elected civil servant.

As governor, you took an oath of office to uphold the entirely godless and secular U.S. Constitution. You have misused your secular authority and podium to promote not just religion over non-religion, but one religion over another in a manner that makes many Wisconsin citizens uncomfortable. On behalf of our membership, we ask you to immediately delete this religious message from your official gubernatorial Facebook and Twitter…

Look at the assumptions inherent in those statements. First, that the Pauline quotation was theocratic. Second, that the political pulpit is secular. And third, that Walker is upholding an entirely godless and secular Constitution. Now, say what you will about the Constitution, but godless–it is not.

Now, let’s get to the point. The charge of theocracy is a valid one. A theocracy is simply a “rule by God.” Walker thought he was simply quoting an inspirational verse, but in reality the atheists are right. When you assert that strength comes from King Jesus you are affirming his kingship over all things, even the ability to rule rightly.

If the political pulpit is secular, meaning it derives its foundation on no religious grounds, then Walker’s assertion is a threat to a pluralistic society. and he should delete his tweet. But if Walker’s role as a Christian elected leader is first one of submission to the Triune God and secondly, to serve the people of Wisconsin, then the Governor needs to consider the consequences of his tweet. Who are you serving, Governor? If you can do all things through Christ, then have the courage to live consistently your faith in your political office, and while you’re at it, tell FFRF to bring it on.<>

On March 4, 2014 By Uri Brito In Worship Like

What is Shrove Tuesday (or Fat Tuesday)?

Shrove Tuesday is a day of feasting. It marks the conclusion of the Epiphany Season. On this day, the Church feasts before she enters into a more solemn and penitential season called Lent, which is referred to as a Season of Confession.

Shrove Tuesday is celebrated with a pancake dinner, which is accompanied by eggs and syrup (bacon can be added–and it should).

This day provides the Church an opportunity to celebrate once again the abundance of the Gospel in our lives and in the world. The glory of the Epiphany season is that Jesus has given us life and life more abundantly (Jn.10:10). Following the rich feasting tradition of our Hebrew forefathers, the English speaking Church has broadly practiced Shrove Tuesday for over 800 years.

What’s the Importance of this day?

As a tradition of the Church, and not an explicit teaching in the Bible, the individual or churches are not bound by such traditions. However, if churches do practice this, it is important for members to join in this festive occasion. It provides the Church another healthy excuse to fellowship and form greater bonds through a delightful and bountiful meal.

On the day before we enter into the Lenten Story where Jesus commences his journey to the cross, Christians everywhere in the English speaking world will prepare rightly by celebrating God’s gifts to us, so that we can rightly meditate, fast, pray, confess and repent by remembering the sufferings of Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith (Heb. 12:2).

What if my Church does not do Shrove Tuesday?

Assuming the congregation is silent on the issue and has not taken any strong constitutional or theological position on the matter, then as a family you are also free to celebrate Shrove Tuesday. You may also want to invite friends over to enjoy a pancake dinner.

To Shrive

Traditionally, Shrove Tuesday is the day before Ash Wednesday. Ash Wednesday marks the beginning of the 40 days of Lent (Sundays excluded from this number). Whether your Church has an Ash Wednesday service or not, Shrove Tuesday is still valid as a way of celebrating the Christ who has given us all things, including His own body for our sakes (I Pet. 2:24).

Shrove comes from the word shrive meaning to confess. As we celebrate, let us not forget that the Christian life is, as Luther stated, a “life of daily repentance.” Confession is not just reserved for Lent, but it is for all seasons. But on this Lenten Season, we receive a particular reminder (through our liturgical readings and singing) that a repentant heart is a clean heart before God (Ps. 51:2).<>

On February 25, 2014 By Uri Brito In Books Like

Don Miller and the Modern Temptation to Abandon the Institutional Church

The pastoral task has all the ingredients for abstractness. After all, we are constantly engaging dead people and throwing around foreign terms to most in the pew. In fact, many of the concerns I have heard over the years from parishioners of different traditions has been the concern that sermons and pastoral work do not reach the laity. Donald Miller manifested this sentiment in his now controversial blog post I don’t connect with God by singing. I connect with him elsewhere. The article received abundant criticism. Miller asserted elsewhere that he simply intended to start a conversation–and what a conversation he started. In another interview, Miller summarized his post:

And so I talked about the reality that I don’t get a lot out of church when I go. I don’t connect with God very well there, and I wondered if it wasn’t more of a learning style issue because it is a lecture format, and it’s not how everybody learns. ^a

Miller’s concern was not unique. Many have expressed this frustration with the intellectualization of worship. Rev. Jeff Meyers’ wonderful book “The Lord’s Service: The Grace of Covenant Renewal Worship answers Miller’s concern with clarity and with classic historical categories. Meyers argues that worship ought to have a wholistic vision prioritizing every detail as opposed to over-emphasizing merely the word preached.

Don Miller asserts that one of his struggles is that the worship service does not appeal to his style of learning. The worship service has as its emphasis a lecture model. Since Miller does not learn through lecture models, therefore Miller no longer finds appeal in the institutional church. ^b In his interview with The RELEVANT he asserts that he did not qualify things well in his blog post and that looking back he wished he would have not written it. But as the interview continued, Miller affirms the same sorts of things his critics condemned in the original blog post.

I actually believe Miller is on to something. The lecture model of doing church is not the one I advocate. In many ways, the Church–especially in the Reformed tradition, which naturally claims a more intellectual history–has become a magnified classroom with lengthy biblical expositions at its center. Whatever precedes the sermon is only pre-game information. And whatever comes after it is not as significant as the sermon either. But as Randy Booth rightly noted–quoting a portion of James Jordan’s work Theses on Worship– in his booklet A Guide to Worship, “the entire service is sermonic, not just the sermon.” ^c “The sermon itself,” he writes,” is very important, but it is not the all-important event. It is one important part of the many other important parts of worship.”

But if this is the case and any historical/liturgical tradition will attest, and since I am convinced Miller is aware of this historical precedent, then why not work to change this paradigm in the institutional church instead of generalizing it and bidding the historical ecclesiastical traditional adieu? With Miller’s book and lecture platform he could affect thousands of pastors who see worship as a lecture hall. That’s the reformer Don Miller the Church needs, not the one who throws away everything for a literal walk in the park on Sunday morning.

What is Miller trying to get rid of?

According to the author of best-seller, Blue Like Jazz, we have turned over the Acts church to the hands of professionals, known as the pastoral staff. Instead of doing that, we should simply hand out sheriff badges to everyone and say to them that they are all pastors. They are all in control. Sunday serves only to prepare these pastors–male and female–to go forth and be the church wherever they are. First Peter two does affirm our royal priesthood. We are all priests in the sense that we are no longer bound by bloody sacrifices. Christ’s redemption is accomplished, thus transforming us into agents of redemption in the world. However, what Miller fails to see is that Paul does not flatten the priesthood, he sees the priesthood operating differently in different spheres (I Tim. 3, Eph. 4:11-13). There is an office of priest (overseer) that is distinct from the general priesthood that we all inherit united to Messiah, Jesus.

Miller also wants to get rid of the institutional Church as center of community life.

I frequent a coffee shop weekly where one of the baristas is the leader of a church. When I asked him about the church, he told me that they meet at the same coffee shop on Sunday mornings to drink coffee and discuss the Bible. When I asked him to define a bit further what they do, he was quick to point to the flaws of the modern church. “We don’t need structure. We need to return to simplicity.” Since I have lectured on this topic before a few years ago, ^d. I can probably summarize this general view point as the “Romanticized Acts Church” movement. I am no opponent of coffee and Bible studies; in fact, I encourage them. But the idea that a return to the first century Church–as privately interpreted–is the solution to today’s ecclesiastical woes is overly caffeinated.

Why can’t I simply find community on my dinner table? or a pub? –because community life is complex. There is nothing wrong with finding community in these places, but they are all incomplete pictures of community life. They may be fine extensions of the community life, which the creeds refer to as “the communion of saints,” but to assert that that is a legitimate replacement for Word, Sacrament, and Discipline in the context of the gathered community is simplistic and dangerous. What then do we do with the adulterer? or the rich folks who are arriving at the Lord’s Supper and the agape meal and eating and drinking everything before the poor arrive? or the sexual abuse situations that are unfortunately prevalent in our churches? Miller has no answer. “I can maybe set up a board or something like that,” he said casually. But wouldn’t a board indicate some type of structure; the very same type you are attempting to eliminate?

Miller also says that he doesn’t find intimacy with God by singing songs to him.

As one deeply involved in ecclesiastical music, this concerns me. Miller is suffering from the psalmic-less nature of modern church music. What some of us treasure each Sunday through hymns and psalms of lament, imprecation, and overwhelming joy has been largely forgotten. The robustness of masculine voices and the beauty and nuance of female singing has become a forgotten history. All of it replaced by praise bands, and the few songs intended for congregational singing are quickly swallowed by the voluminous instrumentation.

If Miller is saying he simply does not like to sing, then he needs to re-adjust his biblical priorities. A quick search for the words “singing” and “music” will reveal their prevalence, especially in the Hebrew Scriptures. Because I don’t like to do something does not mean I should simply replace or eliminate it from the life of the church.

How Miller finds intimacy with God.

The answer is another example of a faulty ability to differentiate. Miller writes:

The answer came to me recently and it was a freeing revelation. I connect with God by working. I literally feel an intimacy with God when I build my company. I know it sounds crazy, but I believe God gave me my mission and my team and I feel closest to him when I’ve got my hand on the plow. It’s thrilling and I couldn’t be more grateful he’s given me an outlet through which I can both serve and connect with him.

I find his response a wonderful example of missing the point. We all find intimacy with God by working. We were created to work for six days, which means there is a great priority that God places on that. We all find hobbies and passions that fulfill us as men. We all agree with Eric Liddel’s wonderful attestation of the presence of God when he says in Chariots of Fire, “When I run I feel his pleasure.” When Miller works with his crew he feels God’s pleasure. But his intimacy ought to be the outworking of an intimacy that begins when by the Spirit we are seated with Christ in the heavenly places (Eph. 2:6).

Miller’s entire paradigm could be easily dealt with by reading an introduction to ecclesiology. ^e Don Miller is the product of modern individualism. And though he flees from that language with his post-modern categories, ultimately, he falls in his own trap. Miller believes that church is all around us. Yes, we go as church to the world. We carry the name of God. ^f But we go as church because we have already been fed by the head of the Church as we gathered as one body.

Conclusion

Miller’s platform is huge. His simple blog post, which he indicated took him about three minutes to write, led to a firestorm on the web. His attempt to start a conversation actually hinders us from having a more necessary conversation. The question should not be whether we worship in the traditional sense or simply find intimacy with God through other means, the question is “How has God called us to worship?” Further, whether you worship in a more lecture-style congregation or otherwise because of your learning style, what does your personal style of learning have to do with worship? What if God’s way of sanctifying you is by killing your learning style and causing you to appreciate God’s way of learning? What if the institutional church is God’s way of killing your wants so you may conform to his? What if attending church regularly is the way God intended to prepare you to understand intimacy?

I am not one to deny Miller’s connection with God via his work and habits, but I do reject his premise that abandoning the institutional church is the path to a deeper connection. The institutional church, I argue, is the deepest means of finding intimacy with God.<>оптимизация нового а

Read more at http://www.relevantmagazine.com/god/church/donald-miller-church#KDZHerDkw3EuWr6q.99 (back)
If you do not have this book, please purchase Kevin DeYoung’s wonderful work found here: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Love-Church-Institutions-Organized/dp/0802458378 (back)
see Covenant Media Foundation for copies (back)
My lecture at the Family Advance Conference in 2012; e-mail for a PDF copy (back)
Maybe R.B. Kuiper’s work “The Glorious Body of Christ (back)
This is the heart of the third commandment (back)

On February 4, 2014 By Uri Brito In Scribblings Like

On Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Death

Over at LewRockwell, Laurence Vance observes that the drug war is a war on personal responsibility:

I have read in several places that the man who sold Hoffman the drugs should be found and prosecuted. This is ludicrous. Hoffman was successful, famous, and rich–things that many Americans would kill for. Yet, his personal demons were greater than these things. He is the one responsible for his death and his children now being without a father.

<>