Are You Veridical?

How do you respond when the spotlight of truth shines on you?

A natural reaction to my question would be, “What the heck is that?”

If I answered, “Why, it’s simply the product of my virtually endless vocabulary,” I would not be veridical; I would be a liar. Veridical is one of the words I’ve received from Dictionary dot com’s Word of the Day. This particular word is noteworthy because it succinctly encapsulates (okay, now I’m just showing off) a character trait that I long to embody, just like Jesus did.

An example of varidicality cites the George Washington mythos that has the six-year-old little man chopping down a cherry tree, and when his father Augustine challenges him about it, little George is reputed to have said, “I cannot tell a lie; I did cut it with my hatchet.” As he sported the very highest of manly character from an early age, his taking a swing at his father’s cherry tree seems unlikely indeed, though if he had, he certainly would have confessed it.

Speaking of confessions, I must not tell a lie: I am a natural a liar. Truth has always seemed a luxury I couldn’t afford when it would expose me to my actions’ consequences. Even since accepting Christ’s Lordship and realizing the necessity of truth-telling, the temptation to lie has plagued me. Temptation, however is not a sin, so when I feel that old urge to polish the truth just a smidge, the prospect of violating my Savior’s sacred trust repulses me.

Truth is such a rare commodity in this fallen world that it seems like a luxury when just a little white lie could smooth life’s path. When you’re tempted to to polish the truth, just remember what Jesus said to the self-righteous, religious Jews in John 8:44, “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” Notice how Jesus grouped lying with murder, for lying indeed murders the truth.

So, am I veridical? Truth be told, not at all in my own power. But I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. (Philippians 4:13)

C.S. Lewis on Free Will

Here’s the best, and shortest, analysis of personal volition, or free will, that I’ve ever seen. Go, Uncle Jack:

The sin, both of men and of angels, was rendered possible by the fact that God gave them free will: this surrendering a portion of His omnipotence (it is again a deathlike or descending movement) because He saw that from a world of free creatures, even though they fell, He could work out (and this is the re-ascent) a deeper happiness and a fuller splendour than any world of automata would admit.

From Miracles

Truth be told, and to the irritation of both sides of the divine sovereignty issue, the Bible clearly spells out both God’s absolute sovereignty, and man’s personal volition. “How can that be?” you ask. It’s easy if you’re God. Just don’t limit God to your ability to understand His Truth. Ever!

GREATER WORKS THAN JESUS?

Jesus heals the lame man at the pool.

John 14:12  Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father.

Did Jesus know how these words would cause controversy among His sheep? As the universe’s eternal Creator, He had to.

Many will disagree with my opinion on this passage so I’ll get the outrage out of the way first, so I can tell you how I came to my conclusion; Jesus didn’t mean to say that individual believer’s miraculous works would in any way exceed His, after all, He is the ultimate source of power in the universe, so all of His followers’ works are done in His power. To say we can do greater miraculous works than He did is like saying the high tension wires leading away from a power plant have more power than the plant itself.

So, if He didn’t mean it that way, what did He mean?

Jesus is Father God’s divine Son who, as I’ve already said, created all things, both observable and invisible. For Him to restore limbs to the lame, sight to the blind and life to those who have died is no great feat. He possesses power for that and infinitely more. But when His followers perform the works that He took in His stride, such works are relatively far greater for us than they were for Him. Jesus knew who He was, so His faith required no leap at all. We, on the other hand, identify with Jesus only by faith, and not by sight.

I hope that explanation meets with your approval, even though God’s word doesn’t spell it out. Of course, I could be all wet, and Jesus meant exactly what our English translations say. Whether or not you accept my thoughts on the matter, you must believe in Jesus and accept His gospel if you hope to receive His eternal life.

Uncle Jack! Really?

There are three things that spread the Christ life to us: baptism, belief, and that mysterious action which different Christians call by different names—Holy Communion, the Mass, the Lord’s Supper.

If you have once accepted Christianity, then some of its main doctrines shall be deliberately held before your mind for some time every day. That is why daily prayers and religious reading and churchgoing are necessary parts of the Christian life. We have to be continually reminded of what we believe. Neither this belief nor any other will automatically remain alive in the mind. It must be fed.
C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

Here is one area where I depart from Lewis’ beliefs; religious practice is an outgrowth of walking in Christ’s way, not the means. In Lewis’ day, the two may have seemed one and the same, but they are not. The only thing that truly spreads Christ’s life to us is faith, producing in our lives the fruit of His Spirit. To pursue the religious practices he listed as a primary goal is simply to hang religious window dressing on a carnal life. Really, Uncle Jack. I thought you knew better.

Our Daily Bread, on Human Chess

Doesn’t the angry-looking little man above just rankle you? Even just a bit? Chances are, you see him as a bill-collector and nothing more. But maybe he’s just a kindly old grand dad who hates his job, from which he’s planning to retire next week, if people like you don’t give him a heart attack before then.

Bill Crowder, in today’s ODB, made a strong statement against Christ-followers using people. Even those of us who try to emulate our Savior sometimes fall into the trap of marginalizing those with whom we routinely do business, especially undesirable kinds of business.

I’m sure none who read this have to deal with tax auditors, bill collectors, or even difficult service people, but if you ever do, how would you relate to them? Would you deal with them in a friendly manner? Or would you treat them as functionaries, looking through them to the purpose you wish to accomplish.

This isn’t simply a theoretical principle for me, as I am in the midst of negotiations with my landlord regarding some issues of my own doing. I feel like avoiding confrontation, ignoring her as is my passive-aggressive tendency. But if I am to obey my Savior’s mandate to love my enemy—even though she isn’t my enemy—I must treat her with careful consideration. Honestly, this is hard for me, even though I like to project the image of a, “nice guy.”

We must remember that a person with duties and feelings resides behind every job-doer; whether he or she has to issue a traffic citation, a summons, or an eviction notice, that is a soul that needs to know Jesus’ love, and you or I may be the only Jesus they have ever met.

1 John 4:7-11 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. 10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.

12 No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us.

Does that describe you and me? Or are we just playing games with the people for whom Jesus died?

Screwtape on Using Religion As a Christian’s Stumbling Block

Screwtape (C.S. Lewis’ demonic character) shows real ingenuity in his approach to tripping up Christians.

Success here depends on confusing him. If you try to make him explicitly and professedly proud of being a Christian, you will probably fail; the Enemy’s warnings are too well known. If, on the other hand, you let the idea of ‘we Christians’ drop out altogether and merely make him complacent about ‘his set’, you will produce not true spiritual pride but mere social vanity which, by comparison, is a trumpery, puny little sin. What you want is to keep a sly self-congratulation mixing with all his thoughts and never allow him to raise the question ‘What, precisely, am I congratulating myself about?’ The idea of belonging to an inner ring, of being in a secret, is very sweet to him. Play on that nerve. Teach him, using the influence of this girl when she is silliest, to adopt an air of amusement at the things the unbelievers say. Some theories which he may meet in modern Christian circles may here prove helpful; theories, I mean, that place the hope of society in some inner ring of ‘clerks’, some trained minority of theocrats. It is no affair of yours whether those theories are true or false; the great thing is to make Christianity a mystery religion in which he feels himself one of the initiates.

Of course, the “him” to which Screwtape refers is Wormwood’s personal project, an unsuspecting Christian. Lewis appears to grant him greater discernment than is typically true; I’ve known many “Christians” who displayed pride in their religious affiliation because they either don’t know, or care about, the Bible’s warnings about vain pride.

“Spiritual pride” is an oxymoron. Whenever a Christian takes a, “big I, little you,” perspective based on his position in Christ, chances are he’s not “in Christ” at all. That includes making snarky, patronizing comments to or about atheists or homosexuals, regardless how snarky or patronizing they are.

How easily we forget that the only damnable sin is that of rejecting Jesus’ offer of forgiveness for our sins and reconciliation with the Father. Think of such rejection as a refusal to pray as King David did in Psalm 139:23-24 “Search me, O God, and know my heart! Try me and know my thoughts! And see if there be any grievous way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting!” What is “the way everlasting?” Well, its map is God’s complete Word, and it’s called, “the gospel of Jesus Christ.” Unlike GPS, or Screwtape, it won’t mislead you.

C.S. Lewis on the Incarnation

 

Da Vinci’s Annunciation

The Second Person in God, the Son, became human Himself: was born into the world as an actual man—a real man of a particular height, with hair of a particular colour, speaking a particular language, weighing so many stone. The Eternal Being, who knows everything and who created the whole universe, became not only a man but (before that) a baby, and before that a foetus inside a Woman’s body. If you want to get the hang of it, think how you would like to become a slug or a crab.

From Mere Christianity

Before God fathered Jesus, His only begotten Son, our Savior existed as God’s creative Word. I think Lewis understated his metaphor, though; the picture of a human lowering himself to become a slug is simply not low enough. My mind pictures a human being becoming a bacterium for the sole purpose of eradicating the fatal, Beelzo transgvirus-1, also known as the sin virus.

Lots of folks have trouble with the Biblical statement that Jesus was the only begotten of God, due to their misunderstanding of Trinitarian doctrine. The alleged paradox lies in the idea that Jesus, God’s divine Son, had a beginning, and as God is eternal, that couldn’t be true. As a clever workaround, wordsmiths came up with the phrase, “begotten, not made,” in the Nicene Creed, but they needn’t have gone to all that trouble. The truth is far simpler; Jesus of Nazareth, though He was indeed born in the flesh, was not born of the flesh, because His Father is God Himself. As such, Jesus is the perfect man, the second Adam, who unlike the first Adam, never rebelled against His Father.

In other words, God the eternal Word became a mortal man at Jesus’ conception, enabling Him to be at once, immortal and mortal.

I hope that clears up the “only begotten” aspect of Jesus’ incarnation, so you’ll know the simple answer next time someone asks you the hard question.

More Thoughts About Atheism

I agree with that last sentence, I really do. Atheists don’t have to listen to Christ-followers, and in fact they do not listen to us, any more than required for trying to trip us up. Since they refuse to listen to us, any claims they make against God are completely uninformed; in claiming superior reason and rationality, they are simply lying to themselves. In their ignorance, atheists claim to know where Christ-followers are coming from, lumping us together with all the world’s religions, but they couldn’t be more wrong. Yet, anyone who knows the Bible knows exactly where atheists are coming from:

The fool has said in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt,
They have done abominable works,
There is none who does good.
(Psalm 14:1)

Of course they’ll take umbrage with that, both because it’s from the Bible, and because it speaks from God’s perspective. Atheists refuse to believe they are corrupt, have done abominable works, and do no good, but that verse speaks as much to any unregenerate human being as it does to atheists. Why? Because you don’t have to verbally deny God to act like he doesn’t exist.

Comments, or rants?

Lately I’ve found Facebook and YouTube comments dominated by vehement atheistic sentiment, focused not at deists, theists, Jews or Muslims, but directly and hatefully at Christians, and I find that curious. Theocracy paranoia peppers these public forums with demands for “Freedom from religion,” and worries about Christian fundamentalist terrorism perpetrated on poor, innocent children who are indoctrinated with Biblical values in Christian homes. Given their way, these secularists would outlaw all religious expression, public or private, and establish their own atheocracy. Thing is, they needn’t go to all that trouble, when they can just move to Communist China and enjoy their atheistic society.

Does name-calling win debates?

Atheist claims of openness, free and rational thinking, etc., dissolve like Styrofoam in acetone when they flame Christians with labels ranging from “stupid” to “inbred” to “retard” to “terrorist.” If they are all that passionate, why don’t they invest more time in reasonably refuting the opposition, than in name-calling? Even those few who offer some rationale for their non-belief seem to be stuck on clichés, rather than concentrating on original thought. Lord knows, atheists have a perfect right to express their thoughts in the public forum, as well as to bear the eternal consequences should they be wrong.

My personal faith in Christ began as a skeptic’s honest inquiry, tempered by an absolute confidence in the Bible as God’s only revealed word, highly unusual convictions for a Catholic. Because of my confidence in God’s word, I could no sooner blindly accept Catholic, or any other religious dogma—dictated by corrupt ecclesiastical systems—than buy into atheistic dogma—dictated by flawed human reason.

Religion by any other name …

Creation’s Beauty

Upon beholding creation’s spectacular beauty and precise order, both creationist and evolutionist explanations seemed markedly hollow and patently dogmatic. The evangelical in-crowd insists on six, 24-hour creation days, while savvy evolutionists believe the universe created itself. Both propositions require incredible faith, and adherents cling to them with religious fervor. For creationists, that’s understandable, but for atheists?

By their behavior, both sides have eliminated any question as to which has the truth. Their mutual mudslinging tells me both are deceived. The only alternative I have found worthy of pursuing is the only Jewish Messiah who fully satisfied all Scriptural prophesy concerning himself, having performed historically verified, unique signs and wonders, proving to unbiased inquirers that he is God’s only Son after his own kind. Jesus of Nazareth lived perfectly, died cruelly, and rose from the dead, not to establish a religion, but to buy back from the enemy of our souls a faithful remnant, willing to accept God’s love and to love him in return, through their conformity to his righteous example. Contrasted against all human religions, in Jesus there is no hatred, bigotry, or cruelty, but only love for his entire creation.

In view of religion’s track record, I cannot fault atheists for their skepticism, but I do fault them, and human religion’s followers, for their imperious belief that they know all, and that anything outside of their understanding is patently false. Oh, don’t we love our catechisms, including “science” texts for materialists. But God’s truth comes only from his Word, through his Holy Spirit and faith.

Let the atheists fuss; it doesn’t hurt God’s feelings in the least.

C.S. Lewis on Deliberate Compromise

For each of us the Baptist’s words are true: “He must increase and I decrease.” He will be infinitely merciful to our repeated failures; I know no promise that He will accept a deliberate compromise. For He has, in the last resort, nothing to give us but Himself; and He can give that only in so far as our self-affirming will retires and makes room for Him in our souls.
From The Weight of Glory

Again, how can I improve on Uncle Jack’s simple-yet-powerful statement? A Christian’s deliberate compromise is nothing less than presumption on Jesus’ blood. Does His redeeming blood even cover that? Such is the stuff of controversy over the centuries, with no agreement in sight. Lewis apparently believed that Jesus’ blood cannot cover such presumption, but he was a layman, while John Calvin, a theologian, disagreed.

In my mind (for what that’s worth), the distinction is moot; belief that Christ’s redemptive work applies to me personally, and accepting it by faith, precludes any such deliberate compromise. Apostle James said it best:

James 2:14-26 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? (15) If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, (16) and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? (17) Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself. (18) But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” (19) You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. (20) But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? (21) Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? (22) You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; (23) and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God. (24) You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. (25) In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? (26) For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

Some would love to see that passage torn out of the Bible. They want to do their own thing, relying on their supposed eternal security for “fire insurance.” But, just as cheap insurance is worth what it costs, so is cheap grace. In fact, cheap grace is no grace at all, as our redemption cost Jesus everything.

The Law of Unintended Consequences

Oops

This evening I had the best of intentions … pretty much, anyway. A while after my evening meal (I wouldn’t glorify it with the title, “dinner.”), I decided to take my bedtime pills and retire. So I waltzed over to my pill sorter, only to be reminded that it was empty. Not terribly daunted, I took it over to my computer desk to refill it in front of a Netflix movie; multitasking is next to godliness, right?

So there I was, carefully sorting out my supplements and meds while watching a good movie and munching on these amazing, “Dark Chocolate Super Fruits” from Costco, in preparation for downing my meds, some of which must be taken with food, and I forgot to quit munching. I mean, dark chocolate is good for you, and super fruit is good for you, so this particular snack must be great for you, right?

Three hours after retiring, my eyes popped open and refused to pop back closed. Seems I’d forgotten about the caffeine that resides nefariously in dark chocolate. Besides, I felt hungry after all that (ahem) sugar. Well, fifteen minutes of that is enough for anyone, so I climbed out of bed, donned my jeans and robe, made some PB-and-honey toast, brewed a cup of sleepytime tea, and sat down to write this blog post.

What I had intended for good … pretty much, anyway … had caused rather inconvenient, unintended consequences. That’s my life’s story—and that of every other human being.

Even Jesus faced unintended consequences when he remained in Jerusalem to lecture the lecturers instead of accompanying his family back to his home in Nazareth. His mom and dad were worried sick when they couldn’t find him along the dusty, bandit-infested, Palestine road, so they turned back to search for him. What perils they faced, abandoning the caravan of pilgrims to return to Jerusalem, but they loved their son enough to risk anything to find him.

The Bible doesn’t record his apology to his folks when they found him in the Temple teaching the teachers, but I’m sure he must have. After all, that would only be the right thing to do.

Despite our best intentions, we too occasionally pursue actions that turn south on us. Perhaps we unintentionally offend a brother or sister in the Lord, or drop a news-bomb that we thought was common knowledge. Christ-followers don’t intentionally gossip, but none of us are always able to perfectly control our tongues (note the triplet of absolutes in that sentence).

Whether we are the offender, or the offended party, we have two choices: During such embarrassing moments our first impulse as the offender is usually to make excuses or dismiss the offense as trivial. That, however, instantly transforms a thoughtless oversight into a true offense that could, and often does, grow into a brierpatch of bad feelings. Our second, and more difficult choice, is to fess up and beg forgiveness. Sure it wasn’t intentional, but it was hurtful, and needs to be positively dealt with before it can infect the church with division.

The offended party also has a significant responsibility, and that is to forgive the offense. Whether or not the offender responds in a godly manner to their gaffe, Jesus’ Law of Love requires that we forgive up to 490 times (Matthew 18:21-35). The alternative is sin, even if you’re technically in the right.

Jesus said that reconciliation is more important than sacrifice (Matthew 5:23-26), meaning religious practice. So, before you offer praises to God, take care of those unintended consequences; it’s the law!