ABNY Week

I'm in a rather unique window of time this week. 

Last week, my dad began cancer treatments. It's not a grave scenario, and the non-chemo treatments are for better quality of life rather than trying to stave off his mortal decline. The side effects are not severe, and in his case, manageable and quite minor. But it's still cancer treatment, an ominous reminder of the inevitable degradation of the human body. We get old and eventually die.

On the other hand, this Sunday, I won't be with you all because I'll be at my folks' church with the amazing privilege of baptizing my own mother. Baptism is the most prominent Christian symbol of new birth, new life, and our everlasting existence in the Kingdom of God. The exact opposite of the decay and death of our fallen state. The promise that is needed only because of things like cancer.

And I'm in this week, the middle of these two events in the lives of my own parents. Yet, this week is a microcosm of the era we all live in - somewhere between the inevitable destruction of these bodies and the fulfillment of the eternal promise of everlasting life by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.

We must not, however, think about the Kingdom of God as something that is only future. There is clearly a great future of enjoying the full Kingdom for all time, with the complete absence of sin, death, sorrow, pain, suffering - the complete absence of the results of being a sinful race. No more cancer and no more cancer treatments and no more side effects of cancer treatments. New, glorified bodies designed to endure forever.

However, the Kingdom of God is also present. Jesus told His own generation that the Kingdom of God was already upon them. At the moment we become members of God's family through faith in Christ, we enter the Kingdom in this era. Our citizenship is in heaven already. We can experience attributes of the Kingdom today. We can live as citizens of the Kingdom this week. Jesus can be our King and reign over every aspect of our lives now. Even while we have things like cancer. Especially because we have things like cancer.

We can also bring aspects of the Kingdom to those God puts us in contact with. Not only can Jesus reign over our lives, but by our influence through the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit, we can bring the goodness of our King to our environments, "on earth as it is in heaven." 

We cannot usher in God's Kingdom, and it is not our task to (contrary to what the "Kingdom Now" theologians claim). We can, however, bless those around us with the benefit of the Kingdom's impact on their lives, too.

If you are not yet sure you're a member of this Kingdom already, it would be a privilege for me to talk with you about it.

In this week, between cancer and the sign of new birth into the Kingdom of God, I rest in the already but not yet. I am able to rest because I know I have already entered that Kingdom, and I am convinced that its fulfillment is even more inevitable than the decline of my own body.

New Year's Surrendolutions

Stories of triumph by means of human determination fascinate us. We never seem to tire of hearing stories of men and women persevering through jungles of challenges and the slimmest of odds, willing themselves to great accomplishments. The stories inspire us, encourage us, and restore hope in the power of human effort.

Theologically, however, we also recognize that even the greatest of human accomplishments are like filthy rags when compared to the perfection in God's character (Isa 64:6). This does not rob these accomplishments of their greatness, but it serves to show how awesome God is - so much greater than the best of our best that even these feats are like tattered rags. Therefore, we are left unable, even with our greatest human accomplishments, to elevate ourselves to God's level and thereby merit salvation.

How, then, should we view the traditional New Years' Resolutions? Should we take up the challenge of human endeavor to will ourselves into better habits, self-improvement, and narrower jeans? Or should we hold to the vanity and impotence of human effort alone, and declare that these resolutions are self-deluding?

I suggest a different approach.

The arrival of the new year is a fantastic time to take stock, evaluate your year, your priorities, your stewardship of time, talent, and treasure, and to look forward to making the next year better than the previous. We often have extra time off of work and other responsibilities, so we have a ripe environment for self-evaluation. If you are going to set personal goals, this is perhaps the best time of year to do so.

Resolutions can be encouraging or defeating. Rather than "goals," we call the "resolutions," which means I resolve myself to do something, such as losing 20 pounds or reading the Bible through. If I meet these resolutions, I feel pretty good about myself.

However, if I make it as far as March, but then drop my diet and my exercise, I am not merely failing to meet a goal - I am failing at something I resolved to do. By making a resolution, I put my character behind this. I put the integrity of my name on it. And now, my failure is a failure in my character, not just my waistline. This is why not meeting a resolution is more deflating than merely missing a goal.

Rather than resolving ourselves to try harder, I suggest listing ways you believe the Lord wants you to surrender to Him in 2014. This involves spending some time in prayer, at the ready with Bible, pen, and paper, asking the Lord what areas of your life need to be surrendered to Him. As He illumines you, write down those things. Be specific. Don't make the list impossibly long, but don't make it unchallenging, either.

Then, in prayer, begin your first surrender by surrendering the list back to Him. Surrender yourself to the process of surrendering these things in 2014. Then keep that list where you will review it at least once a week for 52 weeks.

Rather than resolving to lose 20 pounds, surrender to the Lord to be a steward of the body He gave you. Spend the year focusing on that surrender, which will naturally result in better diet and more exercise. Rather than resolving to read the Bible through, spend the year learning how to surrender yourself to the study of and obedience to His Word. Rather than resolve to learning the Mongolian language or taking a night class or reading 50 books, spend the year surrendering your mind to the Lord, for its renewal (Rom 12:1-2). Rather than setting a goal, begin a process of surrendering more of your life to God.

It's still very much like a resolution, and it still takes effort and perseverance, but rather than the mere grit of human determination alone, it becomes a very spiritual exercise of relinquishing yourself to Christ for His purposes. Then by the end of the year, if there is any success at all, you'll have a compelling, encouraging story to share with others. And all the motivation in the world to surrender even more in 2015.

A View from the Canyon

The Grand Canyon is the world's most beautiful hole in the ground. A mile from rim to river, 10 to 18 miles across, 277 miles of river, encompassed in a park covering over 1900 square miles (http://www.nps.gov/grca/faqs.htm#big). With breathtaking vistas, layers of hues, and rugged beauty, the canyon is an untamed beast refusing to be domesticated by the dots of people on the rim looking down.

Some people have never seen the canyon in person. They likely have seen stunning photos and video. Perhaps they've gotten a glimpse from an airplane window, but that doesn't really count, either. They know that the canyon is awesome, but they've never experienced that the canyon is awesome. They probably know someone who has been and can tell them how awesome it is.

Most of the people who have seen the canyon in person and gasped at its size and beauty did so from the safety of the rim, likely from behind the safety of a guardrail. And now, you can even step out into the chasm a bit on the glass-bottomed skywalk, but still safely behind a guardrail. These folks can tell you from personal experience how awesome the canyon is.

(Image from http://www.grandcanyonwest.com/images/latestnews/l-skywalk.jpg)

Imagine, though, someone who wanted to not just be near the canyon, but in the canyon! I'm not talking about renting a burro or scaling the face, but someone who takes a running jump off of the rim, sails a mile downward into the canyon, and SPLAT! Really, really in the canyon! We would say, "How crazy! What a waste!" The man (or woman) threw away a perfectly good life. Even if that life was troubled, it's still a crazy waste, we would say.

Spiritually speaking, there are those who are like the ones who have never seen the Grand Canyon in person. They may have heard about Christ to some degree, but have never met Him "face-to-face." They may know several people who claim to know Him personally, they may even have the impression that Jesus is somewhat awesome.

Others can be like those who have seen the canyon from the ledge - safely behind the guardrails. They attend church somewhat regularly, they read the Bible once in a while, they know from observation that Jesus is incredibly awesome. They could tell others how awesome He is. But they've never taken the leap. They've never been in the canyon - always behind the guardrail.

Still others have taken the flying leap off the rim. No safety net, no scaling gear. Just sailing off into the depths of the canyon. And, just like what would happen in the real canyon, SPLAT! They die!

They die to sin. They die to the "old self." They die to the ways of seeking the pleasures of the flesh. They die to pride, selfishness, rebellion, idolatry, and most of all, religion. And the world says of these who die, "How crazy! What a waste!" All the world sees is a man or woman "throwing away" a perfectly good life. What a crazy waste!

But unlike the canyon, those who make this plunge are resurrected to new life, the "new man," the new creature of the new creation. They are "born again" or "born from above." Scripture says two things about this curious reality: 1) One must die in Christ before he is raised with Christ, and 2) All who die in Christ will be raised with Christ. In other words, SPLAT! of the old self is necessary, but it is always followed by resurrection to the new self.

If the world does not assess our lives as a "crazy waste," then we appear to them to be on the rim of the canyon, not in the canyon itself. At the canyon, not in the canyon. At Christ, but not in Christ. Someone can be in Christ but appear to the world as being only near Christ, and safely never being labeled a "crazy waste." The world should, and in fact the world must, see our lives as a crazy waste, rather than safely on the rim behind the guardrails. We must entice the world to scratch their heads, wondering how we could "throw away" our lives. That is the only way they will know what it means to be in Christ.

Romans 6:4 - Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. 

The Latest NIV

The 2011 update to the NIV translation of the Bible is due out this month (the online version has been available since last Fall). One of the major goals of this translation was to provide a more "gender-inclusive" translation. The issue is that original languages (Greek and Hebrew) often used masculine pronouns ("he," "him," "his") and related words in ways that were intended to include both genders. The new NIV, along with the earlier TNIV and the NRSV, attempt to provide a version that doesn't grammatically exclude women.

This is a noble goal. For those passages that are clearly intended to apply to men and women alike, we want the text somehow to reflect that. No one should feel like an afterthought in God's plan. But this approach to translation is not without its difficulties:

• Many gender-neutral translations change passages that really should be left in the masculine. For example, being a "son of God" is not exactly equivalent to being a "child of God." Not that sons are better than daughters, but that there were certain unique aspects to the sonship relationship in the culture of the author that get lost in these translations - the idea of inheritance, responsibility, carrying on the family name, and so on. Those ideas are part of the imagery of the phrase, but we lose it when the translation only focuses on the more generic child relationship.
• In order to make a passage gender-neutral, often times the translator has to resort to an awkward phrase (for example, using "sons and daughters" every time "sons" occurs). The extra wording can clutter up a sentence easily. Using the masculine, with an inclusive meaning, reads more smoothly.
• Or, the translator will use a plural ("they," "them," "theirs") instead of the singular in order to neuter the sentence. This effectively takes gender out of it, but then you've changed the nuance of a phrase, losing the personal touch of an individual relationship with God, and sometimes sounding grammatically incorrect.

The noble goal has plenty of landmines. An attempt to clarify the meaning of a passage can actually skew the meaning of the passage, which by definition would be a poor translation.

For more information about the new NIV and the translation choices they made, see the following websites: http://www.cbmw.org/Blog/Posts/CBMW-Responds-to-New-NIV2011 and http://galvestondailynews.com/ap/bee3b4/.

The NET (http://net.bible.org) does a very reasonable job of indicating when a passage is meant to be gender-inclusive. They make pretty good choices of when to retain the masculine wording, and every time they choose a more gender-inclusive phrase than the original language, they make a clear note of it. So, you always know what the original said, plus you get a good indication of which verses are meant to transcend gender.

The interesting point for me in this is the translation principle - if the text says "men," but the text means "men and women," what's the best way to translate it? If it says "men" and means "men," then the answer is simple (but some translations still change it!). But should a translation mirror the verbal text or the meaning of the text? The answer is that both can be good choices, as long as the reader knows what you've done. The translator should either leave the text alone and let the readers and commentators decide, or they should change the text with a clear note of what the original says. That's why I like the NET - they do this well. Only when it's obvious to be inclusive should the translator even consider a more inclusive phrase. When in doubt, the translation should leave the text as is.

Translating the Bible is filled with difficult choices. With the hub-bub around the new NIV, I don't want to immediately criticize it just because some gender-loaded terms got translated in an inclusive way. That can be a valid translation. However, as the CBMW article above notes, there are enough of unnecessary changes in the new NIV, changes that skew the meaning, to be a very strong concern. (Furthermore, there are enough difficulties with the current NIV that I choose not to use it, and especially not for teaching.)

We should all know that the original languages used the masculine for a convenient and clear style, not to exclude women from God's grace. A good friend of ours, Dr. Fred Sanders, made the recent observation that it's not just the women who have to tolerate being called "sons of God" - we men have to tolerate being called the "bride of Christ"!

I'm a low-res kinda guy

I'm a low-res kinda guy. Low on resolutions - New Year's resolutions - that is. I'm just not into making them. If people make them and keep them, great! I just don't do so well in making commitments just because it's a new year.

I think of King Solomon - the son of David who succeeded him on the throne, the one who asked God for, and received, fantastic wisdom. As we learn in Ecclesiastes, Solomon was accomplished in just about every area of life (in the world's eyes). He was king over a nation during a golden period. He was fabulously wealthy. He had a stellar education. He tried every experience a man could try. He had hundreds of women at his disposal. He had monumental wisdom (which he clearly had failed to use often later in life). He had it all.

In other words, Solomon had every human advantage to make and keep resolutions. He had the world at his disposal to keep whatever New Year's resolution you could think of. And he tried ... repeatedly. And he failed ... repeatedly.

Solomon was looking for more than just some weight loss or quitting cigarettes. He was looking for meaning, and he resolved all kinds of things in order to find it. Isn't that what we really want resolutions to bring us - more meaning, more satisfaction, more joy? But - even though Solomon had every resource available to him - he failed. His resolutions failed.

If the one who had the world's best resources for successfully keeping resolutions failed to find one ounce of meaning in those resolutions, I figure I need a better approach. Eventually, Solomon concluded the same thing.

I don't need to turn over a new leaf, I need new life. I don't need to do better at life, I need a better life. Rather than trying harder, Jesus offers us to replace worldly ways with godly ways. The more we abandon our hearts to Him, the more of this life He gives us. And it has meaning.

To me, New Year's resolutions are designed for us to try harder. Submitting to God is not about trying harder - it's about releasing yourself to the full control of the Holy Spirit more and more every day.