Penitential Psalms

You've blown it. Again. The same sin. Again. And what's worse, it's bugging you less each time - and that bugs you. You worry that you're becoming insensitive to sin, and you worry that you'll never get this sin behind you. To be honest with yourself, you're really not all that motivated to repent. Again. What do you do?

Been there? I have.

There is no easy fix to persistent sin. If I found an easy fix, I could make a fortune on book rights. But there is one thing that I've found that helps. It helps rekindle the sensitivity to sin, and it has even helped rekindle the desire to repent. When I'm stuck in this kind of situation, I like to read the penitential psalms.

The penitential psalms (6, 25, 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, 143 - depending on whose list you follow) are those psalms in which the psalmist confesses his own sin. Several are by David, but a few are by other psalmists. For whatever reasons, these men wrote psalms as part of how they processed through the sin itself. And we are the benefactors of them pouring our their hearts to the Lord.

When I'm stuck in that rut, I slowly read through each psalm, and reread them, until my hard heart begins to melt. I can't make it melt, but reading God's Word often does have that effect. Eventually, my resistance to prayer and confession eases away, and before too long, I'm in prayer with the Lord about my sin. Again.

This is not a miracle sure. If you approach this like a recipe, it won't "work." But if you turn to God's Word with the sense of just dwelling there until God softens your heart, I have found it to be very helpful. This won't necessarily "cure" you from ever committing the sin again. It may be an approach that does nothing you at all. As a fellow traveler, this is one thing that has benefited me.

Write down these psalm numbers in your Bible. I put all of my on the page with Psalm 51, because that's the psalm that speaks to me most about repentance. I know where to turn to in order to find my list of all the other penitential psalms.

For God so loved the world...

I don't like to talk too much about the original languages of the Bible when I teach. I'll bring it up when I think it's helpful, but it's usually not all that helpful, really. It sounds impressive, it feels like we're learning something, it's interesting to a number of people, but let's be honest: sometimes an aorist is just an aorist - you know what I mean? (If not, then I've made my point.)

I do, however, try to study aspects of the original languages when I prepare a teaching. I try to do good homework, and make sure that what I teach is as accurate as possible. I need to do the work (and I should do more of it than I do!), but that doesn't mean that the details need to fill time in a sermon. More often than not, it improves preaching without becoming the content of preaching.

Then there are those times when it is necessary to spend a little, or a lot, of time describing the original languages. It's a tough call to know when it's helpful, and when it just strokes my own ego. ("Hey, look, I can't remember Hebrew grammar very well, but I can still pronounce it! Impressed?")

One of those cases where it is actually helpful is in perhaps the most recognizable verse in all the Bible - John 3:16. Most translations read something like, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son..." This is an accurate English translation of the original language. But there's a distinction that Greek makes that English can mask.

"God so loved the world." If you're like me, for a long time I took this to mean that God loved the world so much that look! He gave us something! His only Son! Wow! He sure loves us a lot.

The translation is accurate. The word translated "so" can mean "so much," but it can also mean "thusly." One is magnitude, the other is manner. It's the difference between "she is so smart" and "she carefully arranged the flowers just so."

If it's the second definition that applies, then the verse says, "For God thusly loved the world that He gave His only Son..." (the NET has "For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son...").

That's different. Not monumentally. Nothing in our theology is shaken because of this. But it's different.

Does this say that God loved us that much (so D.A. Carson), or does it say God loved us in that manner (so R.H. Gundry)? The second choice is the most common use of that word, but there are cases when it means the first choice. Some even argue for both meanings, since John is no stranger to intentionally picking a word to mean two things. Certainly, both statements are true. But what is this verse saying?

The Gospel of John uses that same Greek word 13 other times, and in every one of those cases, it means thusly. Therefore, I believe that it means thusly in 3:16. In what manner did God love us? By sacrificially sending His one and only Son to die on a cross so that we can have eternal life by faith. That's the manner in which He loved us.

Yes, He loved us that much, but He loved us in that manner - which is what I believe John 3:16 is telling us.

(By the way, the word "loved" is in the aorist tense - just in case you were wondering.)

Do you know?

When you say "How are you?" to someone...

Do you know the hurt disguised by the easy smile?
Do you know the pain that has never been voiced?
Do you know the doubts that breed on sleepless nights?
Do you know?

Have you heard the fights renewed on the way to church?
Have you seen the scars from wounded errors?
Have you touched the tears that no one is allowed to see?
Have you?

Can you embrace a shattered heart?
Can you love those who aren't sure how to?
Can you imagine someone as flawed as the secret you?
Can you?

Will you know when "fine" is a brazen lie?
Will you allow the masquerade to carry on?
Will you forgive as Jesus forgave?
Will you?

When you say "How are you?" to someone.

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.

The E Word

"Evangelism? AUUUUGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!"

How many of us respond that way to the topic of evangelism? We know that it is something that we should do, but as long as no one brings it up, then we can quietly tip-toe forward without actually doing much about it. And then WHAM!! Someone brings it up, and we have to deal with not doing very much evangelism all over again, get into the guilt, get through the guilt, then get past the guilt into tip-toeing around it again. Until the next time someone brings it up.

We'll even boldly discuss all the reasons we don't evangelize as we prepare to continue not evangelizing: I don't know how, I'm afraid, I might say the wrong thing, I can't get the conversation going in a spiritual direction, and so on. We feel that if we list the reasons why we don't do it, we've made progress (without actually having to do it!). 

Part of our problem is lack of being equipped - we don't because we're not prepared to. Part of it is a matter of our will - we don't because we don't want to. Part of it is fear - we don't because we fear disobedience less than we fear rejection. And yet, hammering ourselves with these truths rarely, if ever, produces the kind of evangelism we should engage in.

One big part of our problem is that Hell isn't real enough to us, yet. We don't get how hell-ish Hell is, and so we don't feel an urgency to offer rescue to those around us.

But another big part of our problem is that we have a weak idea of what "evangelism" actually is. We too often think of evangelism in a particular, narrow, uncreative way. We think of coming up to strangers with little booklets or trying to force fit our conversations with friends to spiritual topics (deathly afraid that we'll actually succeed in steering the conversation to spiritual topics!). If we can get a better idea of what "evangelism" is, perhaps it won't seem so foreign to who we are.

The goal of any act of "evangelism" is not necessarily to "close the deal" - to bring someone to the point of praying to receive Christ. That's right - a majority of evangelism is not for the immediate goal of having someone "pray the prayer." That's always the ultimate goal of evangelism - make no mistake about it - but in a single instance of evangelism, more often than not, bringing someone to the point of decision is not the goal.

One of our big hang-ups about evangelism is freaking out over the responsibility to bring someone to that point. But if we can get it into our heads that "doing evangelism" is not so narrowly defined, I think we'll be more likely to "do evangelism."

This article is too short to spell it all out - my goal here is to spark your curiosity for future discussions. But let me hear from you. I want to know from you how your idea of "doing evangelism" would change if I said that evangelism is really about helping someone be more positive about Christ than he or she was before. What do you think? How would that change your reaction to the word "evangelism"? Let me know!

A What Kinda Christmas?

I am going to make this fantastic, large, delicious meal for you. It will take a lot of work in the kitchen, but I really want you to dine well. It's my specialty, and there's no one who can make it like I do. And ... it's free!!!

The main course is roast beef. Slow-cooked with hickory, it's so tender it cuts with a butter knife. It's not dry at all - the natural juices flavor every bite. Just a hint of fresh black pepper. But, while you're eating, be sure to remember the true meaning of roast beef.

The mashed potatoes are so rich, you don't need butter or gravy (because there's already a couple of sticks of butter mixed in - plus just enough sour cream). I leave the skins on the potatoes for a little texture. Piping hot, you plop them on your plate and they're so thick, they don't ooze into the roast beef. But, remember that dinner is the purpose for the potatoes.

The green beans are steamed, so that they are still crisp. Sprinkled with bacon bits and little fried onions, they are a medley unto themselves. They aren't waxy or soggy - just right. But, remember to put "green" back into "green beans."


The best part is dessert - pumpkin cheesecake. It has sprinkles of cinnamon in it, and it lies on a graham-cracker crust made by hand. It melts in your mouth, and makes you happier and happier with each bite, from your tongue to your tummy. But remember, the real present is just having you at my dinner table.

Now, if you remembered all four of these things for only a second, but then just simply gorged yourself to satisfy your own appetite, stuffing yourself until you were nearly sick, "remembering" these things doesn't mean a thing at all. Just thinking about these things for a few seconds, but then spending the meal primarily on yourself, isn't really thinking about those things. All you're really thinking about is your own appetite. The meal is about you, not the gift of the meal.

We have Christmas phrases: Remember the true meaning of Christmas, remember that Jesus is the reason for the season, put "Christ" back in "Christmas," and remember that the real present of Christmas is Jesus. We say these things to remind ourselves while the world is busy telling us Christmas is about something else. We should say these things.

But if we just say them for a moment, and then spend the bulk of Christmas gorging ourselves on presents, trying to satisfy our own appetites, we haven't really thought about these things very much. It becomes about us, not the gift of Jesus.

I encourage you at Christmas to refuse to let Christmas be about you, about gifts, or even about giving. Insist that Christmas be about Christ, or let there be no Christmas at all.

# # #

Please remember to join us Saturday for the Bread of Life outreach. I will be driving back from Dallas, so I pray that I'll get back in time to join you.

# # #

The next time someone wishes you "Happy Holidays," ask them, "Which holiday do you want me to have a happy one of?" Then listen, without a judgmental ear. Find out what's important to them, then share what's important to you - "The holiday I want you to have a happy one of is Christmas."

Reading Through Chronologically

I propose that we take on a church project together. I propose that we challenge one another to read through the entire Bible together in 2011. Whether you've done it before or not, it's a great habit to get into, and one of the best ways to stay on it is to read through as a group.

In your bulletins for the next two weeks, we will distribute a reading plan that we can follow together. If you have your own plan, that's fine, too. This plan has the unique features that first, it arranges the readings according the order in which the books were written (according to some scholars). So, it will not exactly follow the order that is in your Bible. Second, it is arranged by weeks, not days. A daily schedule can become counterproductive, because if you fall behind, it can get intimidating to try to catch back up. A weekly schedule gives you some built-in flexibility when you do your readings.

We benefit by reading the Bible through in a year in several ways. It keeps God's Word fresh. It takes us through passages we might not read otherwise. It keeps us in both testaments. It helps us to see the big picture, since there's not as much time to dwell on details. It helps us to see how the parts fit into the overall story of salvation history. And many other benefits.

One of the hurdles when reading the Bible through is when we get bogged down in detailed descriptions of the Law or a long series of "begats." Guess what? It's OK to skim! Skimming is better than not reading at all, and skimming can help you focus on the big picture. So, don't feel guilty if you brush through some parts faster than others.

We'll try to remind you on occasion and encourage you. I suggest that your small group or ministry team spur one another on. Read with your kids. Read to one another. Or, get the Bible on CD or MP3 and listen as you drive and stay on schedule with the rest of us. Any way at all to keep us all together in reading through God's Word is a plus.