Bryan + Blog = Love

I’ve been busy planning the above event (if you don’t know what I’m talking about.. you haven’t read the Title… or looked at the pic…  and who doesn’t do that.  All I do is look at titles and pictures…  rarely read the body text).  This week has been a bit crazy attempting to get the copyright license for the film, a projector strong enough to work outside, and getting the advertising out.

A few weeks ago, our group went to downtown Denver and saw an outdoor screening of ‘Casino Royale.’  It was pretty cool - something fun to do on a summer night.  As we were leaving, Jeff (a member of YAM… or a “yammer”- if you like that.. I’m not so sure).. sorry…  Jeff said, “Why couldn’t we do this?”  I figured that we could.   Well, getting all the things together to do it right (meaning, actually paying the fees and not just showing a movie illegally..  getting a good projector …  not a weak one.. etc) is probably the reason these events aren’t so easy to do.

First, getting the lisence.  It really wasn’t difficult to get the rights for a film.  It is just expensive.  Note: there are non-profit rates.  However, showing a film outdoors does not fit into that category..  it actually costs three times as much to show a film outdoors…  rather than indoors.  Who knew?

Secondly, did you know that renting a projector bright enough to work outdoors (even at night) costs over $500 a day?  Well i do.  now.  This information almost put a nix on the whole idea.  However, it was brought to my attention that a family in the congregation has such a projector.  Some people would say, “Yay God!” at this point.  Not me.  I don’t like that phrase.  A little cheesy.  A little demeaning.  A little like a throw-away-phrase.   Rather than “God is good and faithful and He provides, ” we say, “Yay God” and quickly move to more important things.   Sorry..  odd tangent.

Third, since we were paying some cash to get the rights for the film (and we had a good projector lined up), I figured that we better make the most out of it.  So, I did two things by way of advertisement that I hadn’t done before.  First, I printed off some flyers and went to every coffee shop and bookstore in town to put them up.  New fact #7 for today: Not all businesses love you when you ask to put a flyer up.  Some are alright though.  Second, I advertised on Facebook.  I know right? crazy.  They have a whole system where you can pinpoint what age, location, gender, etc you want to advertise to.  So, if you are a male or female living in Aurora or Parker, CO in the ages of 19 to 35… you may just see an ad on Facebook for our August 7th event.

So.  If you are in those categories… please come.  It should be fun.  And now you know everything that went into it.

See you then.

For the past week or so, I have been working on our upcoming Young Adult Fall Retreat (it’s Sept. 26-28, in case you were wondering).  It’s about two months away, but I thought I should be getting some literature out there.  I’m hoping to get forty people to go.  That may be a high number, but why set the bar low?  Anyway.  I was working on a brochure to get out to the masses.  As I was telling my wife about this, she kept asking me if there was a theme for the weekend.  As in, is there some kind of structure to the retreat or are we all just sleeping in a big house?  While in many ways the purpose of the retreat is to connect socially, I will definitely be planning some talks and devotions.  This will all be connected by a theme.  But I did not have a theme.  If I don’t know the theme, how can I plan the retreat?  How can I design the literature?   I need a theme.

Well, I have a theme.  Yes.  I can shout that now…  “I have a theme!”  It is actually one that I thought of a while back… back when I was doing Jr. High.  However, the theme didn’t go over with my boss and it never got developed.  Thinking back, it may be too complex a concept for Jr. High kids (our previous themes included ‘Summer blockbusters’ and ‘Jr. High School Musical’ - not to take away from those ones… they were effective for that audience).  Anyway.  Like many ideas I have, this one came while listening to music (or watching a movie).  Two songs actually.  But I’ll cite one for now (the other is a Derek Webb song).  When the idea came, I was listening to ‘Lack of Color’ by Death Cab for Cutie.  The song starts this way:

And when I see you, I really see you upside down

But my brain knows better, it picks you up and turns you around.

I looked into it (by which I mean I looked it up on Wikipedia), and Death Cab speaks truth.  When our eye retina processes something, it actually is upside down.  Our brain then works to flip the image right side up.  Anna says the same is true for a camera… but I didn’t check wikipedia about that. Ok.  The theme.  As I was reading through the Gospels, a major theme that seemed to jump out was that Jesus saw things differently than everybody else.  He saw the image of God in tax collectors and prostitutes.  He saw the pontential for God to work in times of struggle.  He saw life in death; weath in poverty; understanding in foolishness; etc.  He saw things differently than we do!  It’s like we see things a certain way and we need Jesus to flip it around for us.  We see things upside down.  Jesus shows us how to see things for how they are.

That’s our theme.  I’m still working on a title.  We will be exploring how Jesus saw things.  How we can see like him.  How to flip things and turn them around.  I’m pretty excited.

Back at my home church in Michigan, I remember a rather strange exchange I once had with the parents of a friend of mine.  I do not remember the context of our conversation, but I recall saying, “Good luck!” to them.  As I said this, they stopped what they were doing and stared at me.  “We don’t believe in luck,” they said, “God is in control.”  Instead of saying, “good luck,” they say, “good God.”  I believe after they told me this I apologized for my apparent ignorance and walked away thinking they were weird.  What was so wrong with saying, “good luck”?  I was not really making a huge theological statement about the sovereignty of God or stating my position in the Calvinist/Arminian debate.  I was simply being polite as they went out one some activity.

As I think about this Christian couple who were so convinced that God has his hand in every aspect of human existence (nothing is left up to chance) that they feel compelled to correct their son’s friend who wished them ‘good luck,’  I wonder to what extent they are right and/or crazy.  Is wishing someone ‘good luck’ taking away from God’s sovereignty?  Has God determined every single action in history?  Is there such a thing as chance or a coincidence?

Let me give an example.  A couple of weeks ago I was making a purchase on Amazon.com of books having to do or concerning young adult ministry.  I spoke with Jan (our executive pastor) about book ideas and she mentioned a friend who might have some good book titles.  She emailed him and said she would forward his email once he responded.  I put my order on hold until I got a response and went on with my life.  The next day, Kent (a staff member on maintenance) came into my office.  “I was at the bookstore yesterday, found this book on clearance but don’t think I’m going to keep it,” he said, “if you want it you can have it.”  It was a book called No Perfect People Allowed by John Burke.  I had never heard of the book or the author, but told Kent I’d take a look at it.  Kind of a random event.  Kent and I talk books from time to time, but he has never given me one or mentioned this one before.  That afternoon I got an email from Jan with the book ideas from her friend and the very first recommendation was No Perfect People Allowed  by John Burke!

I reread the email and saw that the title matched the one given to me that morning.  Now, Kent had not talked to Jan or even known that I has asked her for book titles.  He simply found the book for cheap, picked it up, gave it to me.  So, now the question becomes whether this is a coincidence or God somehow working through all of these elements.

A little background on my view of God’s sovereignty.  I believe that God has control over all things on earth and in heaven.  I believe he can divinly intervene on human affairs and that he is an active God in the lives of his people.  I do not think that this control means he determines every single move in history.  He has given us free will to make decisions.  So, do some things happen just out of dumb luck without God’s direct intervention?  I think so.  I do not think that every thing is from God and that some are just coincidences.  Yet, God does work in his creation.  So, how can we tell what is from God and what is just a coincidence?

I’m not sure that I know that answer.  However, getting back to my book story, I do know that I better read that book!  The parts lined up too well that I’d better assume God has his hand in it.  At the same time, this is a rather small thing (reading a book) so the stakes are not too high.  I don’t know.  I think it is cool what things like this line up.  They may be significant or they may not.  But I do know that God can use them to reaffirm his presence in something or to make clear his will.

What do you think?  Where do you land on all this?

The debate concerning the apparent contradiction between Paul and James over the issue of faith and works is one that dates back to the early church. Since the debate is so vast with so many opinions, its presentation here must be brief.

James’ remarks in 2:14-26 on faith and works reach a climax in v. 24 when he states, “You see that people are justified by what they do and not by faith alone.” When read next to Paul’s words in Romans, there seems to be an obvious contradiction. Paul writes, “For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from observing the law.”

Several theories have been presented throughout Church history. First, Martin Luther saw the contradiction and rejected the book of James, calling it ‘an epistle of straw.’ The canonization of Scripture and Church history have always viewed as an authentic piece of Scripture and we shoul treat it as such. Second, some have argued that James was aware of Paul’s letters and attempted to balance their theology. However, if this were true, James does so only implicitly and indirectly. Rather, James and Paul seem to be talking about very different situations: Paul is justifying the reception of Gentiles into the church without circumcision whereas James is discussing the problem of the failure of works of charity within the church (Davids, 131).

Third, some have offered that James and Paul are using the same words but with two different meanings (same vocabulary but different definitions). Just as they were addressing two different situations, James and Paul had two different things in mind when they wrote ‘faith’ and ‘works.’ James was referring to ‘works’ which come alongside salvation –the results of being a ‘doer’ of the word (1:22) and Paul to ‘works’ of the law which were thought to merit salvation. Craig Blomberg points out that James’ view of works was Christian while Paul’s was Jewish (”works of the law”), and James’s of ‘faith’ was Jewish (monotheism) and Paul’s Christian. What must be stressed is that while both authors use the same terminology, they had very different meanings in mind. Once this background work is done, it seems clear that Paul would have agreed with James (in light of Gal. 5:6) and vice versa.

As we have studied 1 Peter and James, one theme seems to reoccur: trials. The theme, particularly that of suffering, was especially strong in 1 Peter. As we started the book of James, that we would be continuing this topic became apparent by verse 2: “Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds.” Verses 2-11 answer the question of how a believer should respond to trials (the answer, in case you missed out, was by rejoicing at the maturity they can establish, praying for wisdom, and identifying them as universal and leveling experiences). In vv. 13-18, which we looked at this week, James discusses how a believer should not respond to trials (temptations in particular): they should not seek to blame others, especially God.

In between these two sections comes v. 12, which serves as an encouragement to those facing trials. In this verse James writes, “Blessed are those who persevere under trial, because when they have stood the test, they will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him.” We did not spend much time on this verse last Sunday, so it is to James 1:12 which we will focus here.

James, here, seems to be following a line of thinking which is well-established in New Testament writing: life, with all of its trials and obstacles, seen as an athletic race. While the athletic imagery might not be as obvious as other places (especially in Paul’s writings), it at least seems clear that James views life’s many trials as a sort of test (parallel to a race or not) in which the one who perseveres obtains a prize. The word translated “stood the test” is dokimos which is a favorite of Paul to signify human or divine approval. This is the goal of the one facing trials, to pass the test or finish the race.

Other places in the New Testament incorporates this athletic imagery (much more overtly than James). Here are a few passages:

• Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize? Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever. (1 Corinthians 9:24-25)
• You were running a good race. Who cut in on you to keep you from obeying the truth? (Galatians 5:7)
• I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 3:14)
• Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. (Hebrews 12:1-2a)

An interesting parallel between James 1:12 is 2 Timothy 4:7-8. In it, Paul writes, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day - and not only me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.”

In this passage, Paul connects “finishing the race” with ‘keeping the faith.’ James would likewise connect it to “persevering in trials,” which could certainly be part of keeping the faith. Notice also that Paul is pointing to a future reward: a crown. Here he calls it the “crown of righteousness.” In 1 Corinthians he referred to a “crown that will last forever.” In 1 Peter, the author mentions a “crown of glory that will never fade away” (5:4). In 1:12, James refers to a “crown of life.”

While it might be difficult to argue that all these authors had the same “crown” in mind, it does seem clear that they all await a future reward for the believer who finishes the race. It is also difficult to pin point what exactly this crown is. The grammatical construction leads to the translation “crown of life” (in James) and should be understood as expressing that life is the content of the crown. I think the best way to understand the crown is to see it as salvation (or eternal life). It is salvation, which is ours in the present time because of Christ, but will not be fully realized until we are with the Father. There is a popular expression in Biblical circles: “already, but not yet.” It is used to refer to those things which are real in the present time (”already”), but are not fully realized or present until Christ returns (”not yet”). I believe this crown should be understood in “already, but not yet” terminology. We have salvation now, but will fully receive it once we have finished the race.

Whether we agree on this point or not, it is clear is that God has promised a reward to those who faithfully run the race of life. Who keep the faith, persevering under trials. James 1:12, being stuck between two sections on trials and temptations, serves as a wonderful encouragement for continuing in the Christian life. It expresses a promise: those who have stood the test will receive a crown of life.

Martin Luther called the book of James an “Epistle of Straw.” I am not quite sure exactly the word picture which Luther was targeting. His point is clear: James is not as valid as the other New Testament books. Would those books be the “Brick Books” since they are stronger and more solid? Or, am I drawing too much from the ‘Three Pigs and the Big, Bad Wolf’ story - which Martin would never have heard of? Is he appealing to a word-picture that is lost on someone like me? (Like when I refer to ‘Urkel’ or ‘Screech’ to my Jr. High kids and they stare blankly at me). I guess straw is weak… thus, Luther is claiming that James is weak. When he produced his German translation of Scripture, he left James in the back… along with other ‘weak’ books like Hebrews, Jude and Revelation. Have you ever read Hebrews?! It’s not weak! It’s quite possibly the richest book in the NT canon. Or, have you tried Revelation?! with dragons, plagues and a Warrior Christ?! “Weak” does not come to mind.

Ok. That’s not being fair. Luther most likely meant that those books were theologically not as strong as the works of Paul or the Gospels. In his preface to James, Luther wrote this: “I therefore refuse him (James) a place among the writers of the true canon in my Bible; but I would not prevent anyone placing him or raising him where he likes, for the epistle contains many excellent passages.” To Luther, then, the book of James is a non-authoritative piece of Christian literature. Compared (in the modern world) to the works of C.S. Lewis or Rob Bell - has some good thoughts, but no one should take it as the word of God! I don’t mean to pick on Luther. The man was amazing and exposed a Church which hindered the Gospel more than it preached it. He was a genius and truly a man of God.

Luckily, however, the Holy Spirit is active in the composition, canonization and maintenance of Scripture. The truth is that James was well and vastly received within the first 100 years of the faith. It was included in the early canons - although disputed by some. Luther’s main issue was probably with James’ treatment of ‘faith and works.’ In 2:24, he writes: “You see that people are justified by what they do and not by faith alone.” This seemed to stand directly in the way of Paul’s theology that justification is not by works, but faith alone. Luther’s way to solve the problem was to declare one over the other. Or, one as an ‘epistle of straw’ compared to the strength of the other.

While we owe a great deal of gratitude to Martin Luther, we must break ways with him here. James is no ‘epistle of straw,’ but one of theological depth and insight. More than any other book in the New Testament, James calls things for what they are. He does not hold back or sugarcoat anything. The Epistle of James is extraordinarily real and practical for Christian life in any time period.

I’m excited to work through it with you. I’m praying that James’ words penetrate into our souls and we will be open to what God will teach us through this ‘epistle of straw.’

Hey friends. I know, it’s been almost a month since this thing has been updated. I hope that you all enjoyed your Christmas and that you got some rest. I noticed that the older I get, the more excited I get over receiving very ordinary gifts. This year I got socks, metal shirt collar stays, coffee, books, etc. All of these things were thrilling! (no sarcasm, I was actually very excited to get these things). I also got quite possibly the best gift ever: a briefcase. Now, I’m well aware that I might be alone on this one. Few people probably get excited over a briefcase… and to be honest, I’m a little intimidated to start carrying it due to the perception of other people. However, I’m come up with a few amazing scenarios in which having a briefcase is brilliant.

• I could fill the briefcase with hundreds of blank pieces of paper and walk down a crowded sidewalk. Then I would “accidentally” have my case open up and all the papers go flying. I would frantically try to grab the paper as it all blows away. I’m sure people would help me.
• I could team up with a friend in a busy airport and try this: Find a person just sitting on a bench. I would walk briskly parallel to the bench and stop right in front of it to tie my shoe… then get up and leave the briefcase there. My friend, who is dressed in a trench coat and sunglasses, would follow me a few seconds later.. go toward the briefcase, pause to look around… and quickly pick it up and scatter off.
• Or, I could simply sit next to that person on the bench and place the briefcase at my feet. Without looking at the person, I would slide the case over to them with my foot and say something like, “Owls fly at midnight” and when they seem confused I’d look at them and wink. Then I’d say, “Oh, are you not ‘Sparrow’?” When they say, “no,” I’d quickly apologize, grab the briefcase, and walk away.

Of course, I won’t really do any of these… but in my head they seem funny.

Ok, on with the post. We talked on Sunday about our choice when it comes to suffering: we can either become bitter and seek someone (commonly God) to blame or we can see suffering as an opportunity for God to do great things. God, we said, is in the business of making bad things good. So, as we look at 1 Peter 4:12-19 we find Peter changing our whole perspective on things. First, suffering is a time for rejoicing. He writes that our suffering means that we are participating in Christ’s suffering (v.13). Peter also states that when we suffer it is a sign that we are doing something right: “the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you” (v.14). His logic seems to be that to follow Christ is to suffer; thus, our suffering is a sign that we are indeed following Christ (therefore, Peter distinguishes between suffering for doing evil and for doing good - vv. 15-16).

Secondly, Peter changes how his readers should view their persecution. V. 16 is one of the few places in Scripture were the term ‘Christian’ is used. The original use of this term had a derogative sense and was used to mock followers of Christ. Peter turns this on its head and says that we should “praise God” when one “bears this name” (v.16). Again, something used for evil is turned into something good.

When it comes to suffering, Christians are giving a revolutionary way to respond to it: Rejoice! When we suffer for God’s will, it means two things (it probably means more, but two from this verse): First, since God loves to make good from bad, our suffering is an opportunity to trust God and see what amazing things he will do. Secondly, our suffering is a sign that we are following Christ.

What this has to do with briefcases? nothing… i just wanted to slip that part in.

We spent a large chunk of our Bible study this week on a very difficult passage. You remember, the one about Christ going and making proclamation to the “spirits in prison.” We talked about a few popular interpretations (including the ‘descent into Hell’ view) and I presented the idea that possibly Peter is referring to a tradition (possibly including Enoch and Noah) which would have been familiar to his audience but is unfamiliar to us. I encourage you to pursue further reading if our discussion perked your interest. However, I want to focus on v. 22 for this blog post.

In 3:22, Peter talks about the resurrected Christ, at the right hand of God, with “angels, authorities, and powers in submission to him.” This idea of these things being in submission to Christ comes after large sections on how Christians should submit to “every authority instituted among men,” with specific examples. Now Peter tells us that these things themselves are in submission to Christ. However, it is possible that Peter is talking about human authorities, I think that he is also referring to spiritual authorities.

Whether physical or spiritual (or both), the point is that all is made subject to Christ. However, we now live in a time when these authorities have been exposed, but not defeated. A common image is that of D-day and V-day. D-day is used to refer to the significant day which contributes to the victory of a battle. V-day is that day when the victory is realized. Christ’s death on the cross is described as D-day for it was the significant event leading to the eventual victory over sin. V-day is being realized because of what happened on D-day, but has yet to be fully realized (that is when Christ returns).

Therefore, the strongest blow has been given and victory is assured. But, we live in the time between D and V day. The ‘powers and authorities’ have had their fatal blow, but are not yet destroyed. This means that their presence is still a reality, but we can be assured of Christ’s final victory.

Remember, we worship a God of whose victory is assured. Peter can talk about all authorities being subject to Christ because of this assurance.

I am going to try to take some time off today and will probably not be posting today (I will try to get something up tomorrow or so).

However, let me share this with you:

For some reason, in my office there is a copy of the game ‘Twister.’  The cover of the box is facing me and every time I look in that direction I make eye contact with one of the kids on it.  Here’s the cover:

That kid on the right! I don’t trust him! Everyone is laughing, but he is up to something! Ahh!  The kid is freaking me out! Stop looking at me!!

This is a relatively old box.  They have a new one, which is not any less freaky:

why are their heads so big! and why is he not smiling!!

I never liked twister anyway.

Alright, I’ll put an official post up soon!

When the film Se7en came out in 1995, the ads for it contained a quote from Entertainment Weekly critic Owen Gleiberman proclaiming it “a small masterpiece.” This is quite an endorsement for a film and certainly gives the impression that Gleiberman enjoyed it. However, he really didn’t. He gave Se7en a grade of B- and called parts of it “rather corny.” What he did enjoy was the opening credit sequence which “with its jumpy frames and near-subliminal flashes of psychoparaphernalia, is a small masterpiece of dementia.” How did these three words go from describing one sequence to the entire film? Quite simply, it was taken out of context. (source: Wikipedia.org)

Another famous example of the danger of taking something out of context is Psalm 14:1 which states, “A fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” When taken out of context, we have the Bible declaring, “There is no God”!

While these are rather drastic examples, they teach the importance of understanding things (especially Scripture) within a proper context. Last Sunday when we looked at Peter’s address to slaves, wives, and husbands, we learned the same lesson. As we learned more about 1st Century Greco-Roman society, the tradition of Household Codes, and the role of women in the culture, we got a better understanding of what Peter was saying in 2:18 - 3:7. At the same time, as we read this section in light of the letter as a whole (especially 2:11-12), it began to make more sense and misunderstandings were avoided.

The sad truth is that this passage has been misinterpreted and falsely taught throughout history. It can be used to perpetuate the existence of slavery or a male-dominated society. It can be falsely applied to women in abusive relationships or used to encourage needless suffering. As Karen Jobes writes,

“How ironic it is that the words that first-century slaves and wives would have read as affirming and empowering are criticized by some today as enslaving and oppressive. When read within its original historical setting, these verses become a call to social transformation within the Christian community, allowing it to become an alternate society based on God’s redemptive plan” (1 Peter, 209).

An important application we can take from our study of this section is that we must seek out the context of any passage. This applies to reading passages within placement in Scripture (i.e. reading what comes before and after it -in the same paragraph, book, testament, as so on). It also means that we strive to understand the situation of its writer and original audience. This is where commentaries and other Biblical tools are so important.

However, I didn’t mean for this post to turn into Biblical Interpretation 101. Therefore, let’s focus on another important application from this section: we may not have a choice concerning whether we suffer, but we can choose how we respond to it. In this section, Peter calls for individuals (slaves, wives) to remain in their social roles but without selling out their Christian faith. This faith will most likely bring persecution (especially with a harsh master and/or unbelieving husband). For a slave or wife (with practically no rights in 1st Century Greco-Roman society) to convert to Christianity meant that they would suffer. The suffering was unavoidable, but their response was a free choice. Peter encourages them (as a paradigm for all believers) to choose to respond in a godly way, following in Christ’s footsteps - “‘he committed no sin, and no deceit was found on his mouth.’ When they hurled insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats” (2:22-23a).

Let’s focus on a few things. First, Christ’s suffering was unjust. He ‘committed no sin’ and his suffering was undeserved. So too, we must not go looking for suffering. Peter points out that there is no redemptive value in suffering for doing evil (2:20). Second, Christ’s suffering was unavoidable. He willingly accepted this ‘cup’ since there was no other option. We know of other times in Scripture when Christ avoided suffering (John 8:59; Mt. 12:14-15). Likewise, if suffering is avoidable, we should avoid it. Finally, Christ responded to suffering with holiness. As he suffered, he neither retaliated or threatened. Likewise, we are conduct ourselves in a godly manner and, like Christ, keep our trust in God (”he entrusted himself to him who judges justly” 2:23b).

If you would like some additional reading, I have posted some good commentaries and resources on the YAM website.