The Importance of an Accurate Diagnosis

I have often heard that an accurate diagnosis is 90% of the cure. I'm not sure whether or not that's true, but it makes a good point. When we really know what's wrong with us, we're well on our way to a meaningful solution.

I may just be turning into a cynical old man - but I don't think so. The fact is, I'm just not surprised by anything I see or hear these days. But that doesn't mean that I'm passive or content to adopt an "It's all good" attitude and move on. Especially when it comes to my own life. The longer I walk with the Lord the more aware I am of grand daddy Adam's DNA in my life. I'm not too proud to admit that the essence of sin - self-centeredness - is evident in so many ways and on so many levels. While the American evangelical church seems to be focused on condemning sinners for sinning, I'm concerned about the roots that are evident in all our lives. What is the diagnosis for this moral disease? How does it really work?

A passage in John's first letter strikes me as having significant insight into the inner workings of sin. "Everything in the world - the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life - comes not from the Father but from the world" (2:16). It's interesting that John uses the heading of "the world" to describe these elements. John's use of "world" is often defined as "the system of society organized independently from God." It is the best human beings can do without God. In that sense, it summarizes the essence of idolatry, of sin. John begins by exhorting us to not be attached to this system. By definition, separation from God is death. An attempt to organize our lives, corporately and individually, without God at the center, will always bend toward corruption and destruction. Putting ourselves instead of God at the center is idolatry and summarizes our human moral dis-ease and its inevitable consequence. 

John describes "all that is in the world," everything systems of idolatry have to offer, everything the world values, as "the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life." I'm sure you've read somewhere else that "lust" is just the word for "desire." It can be used either positively or negatively, depending on the context. All basic human desires and needs have been created by God. However, if you disconnect them from God, normal human desires with "self" at the center quickly turn into idols. In fact, the tendency is for those desires to become compulsions, and when those compulsions run their course, they become masters and we the slaves. It's amazing how we start out at the center, replacing God, and end up enslaved to base desires gone wild.

The human body has very elemental desires that can become increasingly compulsive and controlling. Whether it be the desire for food and drink or for sexual contact, what is a normal desire can be so separated from God that it begins to "have the mastery." It is so important for us to remember that, ideally, "the body is meant for the Lord," that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit," and that we are to "honor God" with our bodies (see 1 Corinthians 6:12-20). I'm convinced that we don't spend enough time reflecting on what food and sex would look like with God at the center. What is God's purpose for these normal human needs and desires? We can easily understand what the desires of the body look like when they become self-centered compulsions.

Our eyes have their own, although related, issues. It has been said that the eye is the window of the soul. Jesus taught that "the eye is the lamp of the body" (Matthew 6:22). With our eyes we are able to appreciate the beauty of all God has made. We are able to find direction and keep a healthy focus in life as a result of our eyes. However, separated from God, a normal human desire can easily become a compulsive "need" to see. And when our sight is self-centered, it has the power to literally rule both our minds and our bodies. Compulsive, idolatrous "seeing" can lead to a wide variety of exploitative and destructive behaviors. 

The phrase, "pride of life" is translated in several ways: 

• "the pride that comes from wealth and importance" (TLB)
• "wanting to appear important" (Message)
• "the pride in riches" (NRSV)
• "the arrogance produced by materials possessions" (NET)
• "the glamour of all that think splendid" (Phillips)

This phrase literally means, "the bragging and boasting concerning all areas of natural, biological life." A strong word for "pride" is used by John. One lexicon defines it this way: "an insolent and empty assurance, which trusts in its own power and resources and shamefully despises and violates divine laws and human rights; an impious and empty presumption which trusts in the stability of earthy things." A perfect picture of human-centered, self-centered pride. There are plenty of healthy reasons to boast. "In God we make our boast all day long" (Psalm 44:8). On the other hand, the arrogant and wicked man "boasts about the cravings of his heart; he blesses the greedy and reviles the Lord" (Psalm 10:3). "Feeling proud" is not necessarily a bad thing. But what is the source and center of the pride? A pursuit of ego-gratification results in a broken, empty life. There's nothing more toxic than an insecure leader.

The more I think about it the more I see "the pride of life" as the central issue. The empty boasting that can run through my thoughts has the power to lead me down a spiral staircase of self-centered behaviors. It has the power to motivate and justify compulsive looking. It's a fairly small step from compulsive looking to compulsive physical "acting out." Without the grace of God acting on my heart, at the center, transforming my boasting - my sense of worth and entitlement - all other aspects of "the world" are really very predictable.

This reflection reminds me of one of my favorite passages in Jeremiah: "This is what the Lord says: 'Let not the wise boast of their wisdom or the strong boast of their strength or the rich boast of their riches, but let the one who boasts boast about this: that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the Lord, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight,' declares the Lord" (9:23-24). Boasting about intelligence, physical strength, and riches sounds a lot like the lust of the flesh and the eyes and the pride of life. In fact, these three areas are the basis for the value system of this world. We value these things and we value people who have more of these things than others. But the Lord makes clear what he values: kindness, justice and righteousness. And we will also value these things to the extent that we know and understand the Lord.

John concludes with these words: "The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever" (verse 17). Every aspect of this world system is temporary by nature. Focusing our values and desires on temporary things seems fruitless in the end. The only long-term value and meaning to be found in life comes from doing the will of God. Indeed, to know God is eternal life. 

Free to Believe: Pluralism is Not Necessarily Agnosticism

(I need to begin by apologizing for the big words. As is often true with terms such as these, they summarize my thoughts better than a long string of smaller words.)


We live in a society that is intentionally pluralistic. The folks who decided to break away from British society, a society that included social classes and a top-down aristocracy, did so with a commitment to freedom. It was to be a society that was ruled by a representative democracy. There was to be no official religion, church or episcopacy. Everyone was to be free to believe according to their personal convictions. Although there were still a few descendants of the early Puritans who preferred a Christian theocracy, most rejected that idea (especially the leaders in the Commonwealth of Virginia). 

Even though we once again have a few who would like to see America "return" to its roots as a Christian theocracy (even there never was such a theocracy in any state after the American revolution), we are still fundamentally a pluralistic society. We are all of us free to believe according to our personal convictions.

But pluralism is not necessarily agnosticism. A freedom to believe is not the same thing as an insistence that we believe nothing at all. We are free to have clear personal convictions and clear commitments to certain truths. 

Maybe I should take a moment to review the meaning of "agnosticism." It is simply the belief that it is impossible to know anything for certain. We will never have enough evidence to convince us of certain clear conclusions. Therefore we are committed to not ever being "dogmatic" (i.e., clear or certain) about anything. We simply allow everyone to believe whatever comes to mind, knowing that those beliefs will change from time to time. Above all else, we are committed to tolerance of every position and every preference. And we condemn anyone that seems to be "intolerant," i.e., believing that if I am "right," than others are "wrong." As some have pointed out, we have learned to live with the contradictions that we are certain that certainty is not possible, and we are intolerant of intolerance.

While committed believers in Jesus find this to be a very challenging cultural environment to live in, it's also true that some overreact. It's one thing to see a difference between "right" and "wrong"; it's another thing to see a difference between "superior" and "inferior." While we disagree with the perspectives and actions of some, to treat those people with anything other than dignity and respect is to disrespect and discount their humanity. If one of our beliefs is that every human being is a special act of God's good creation, and that God has a special love and purpose for every person, than disrespecting any person, no matter what the reason, is to disrespect God.

"Hate speech" is unacceptable coming from any committed Jesus follower. But then I suppose "hate speech" needs to be defined. It certainly is not a disagreement with someone else's views or preferences. It is definitely not even the view that someone else is "wrong" or that their choices are "unwise" or even potentially destructive. Hate speech involves words designed to tear someone down. to question their fundamental worth, to devalue them as a human being. Hate speech tends to lump groups into "inferior" categories while making prejudicial, stereotypical statements about them. Taken far enough, prejudicial speech (pre-judging based on a certain category or stereotype) can result in intentional, systematic acts and policies of discrimination. (For Americans, that's when we bump into the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.) 

However, respecting all of our neighbors, respecting their worth and rights as American citizens, or even as human beings, does not mean we have to hide or feel awkward about our personal beliefs and convictions. It's OK to be very clear that we believe:

• There is a God who is the Creator/Maker of all things, and as such, owns and has authority over all things.
• God is God and we are not.
• Jesus Christ is the unique, one-and-only Son of God.
• Jesus Christ is the only sure way to reconciliation with God.
• The Good News of and about Jesus is the offer of reconciliation with God given to every human being.
• The Bible is God's written self-revelation.
• The revelation of God in Scripture is authoritative in the life of a Jesus follower.
• A life of committed apprenticeship to Jesus is the life all humans are called to.
• The church is God's only covenant Kingdom community in the world.
• God created human beings male and female.
• Marriage is a covenant relationship binding one male and one female together for life.
• Marriage is the human counterpart to God's plan for the ultimate human relationship with the Creator.
• All human life is uniquely sacred and is to be respected and protected, both before and after birth.

Agnosticism is the default position of the American University system. As a university freshman, agnosticism was my preferred mindset. But I was a "soft boiled" agnostic. A "soft boiled' agnostic believes that it's probably impossible to know anything about ultimate truths with certainty, but wishes it was possible. A "hard boiled" agnostic is dogmatically committed to the idea that knowing ultimate truths with certainty cannot and will not ever be possible. I really wanted to know. So I set out to discover ultimate truths about God through rational processes. I carefully examined every question that pertained to the existence or non-existence of God, one question at a time. For weeks I carried around my copy of "Why I Am Not A Christian" by Bertrand Russell. And I reasoned my way through to answers. But I discovered that for every answer I "found," that answer raised two new questions. I quickly realized that drawing certain conclusions about God and the resulting God-centered way of life was never really going to be possible through rational means only. I began to realize that in the end, faith is a choice. We all freely choose what we believe. The atheist has chosen to believe that there is no God - a choice that cannot be proven rationally. Those who believe in "naturalism" (as opposed to "theism") have chosen to believe that life came into existence through a process of natural selection involving time plus chance plus nothing else, even though while that hypothesis can be tested, that belief cannot be "proven." The hard-boiled agnostic has chosen to believe that it is impossible to know - even though that conclusion cannot be proven rationally. And every choice has consequences which can be examined in human history. In the end, I needed to freely choose what I believed. And I made my choice. 

And we respect those who disagree with these faith decisions as being no less human and no less loved by God. "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind" (Romans 14:14). The Good News of this Easter season is that Jesus died for every human being equally, and that he rose from the dead, conquered death, to give eternal life to every human being - "whosoever will may come." That is our message to the world, a message to be proclaimed and lived out in our daily work and relationships. Soli Deo Gloria!

The Promise of Justice

"That's not fair!" 

If you've raised kids at all, especially through their teenage years, you have heard this exclamation far too many times. Classically, we respond with, "Well, life's not fair!," hoping that will settle the matter. And while life certainly is not fair, the bigger problem is with a misunderstanding of the word "fair."

When a child or teen (or even some adults) point out that an action or decision was not fair, they usually mean that it didn't go their preferred way. They didn't get their way, their personal desire was not fulfilled. Someone saw it differently or made a different decision, and usually said, "No."

But a short-sighted, self-centered perspective of "fair" really has nothing whatever to do with fairness. The larger idea of "fairness" is "justice." This idea of fairness/justice is really about equality, equity, life as a "level playing field." Justice assumes that every human being is equally a special creation of God with equal worth. Justice insists in equal opportunity and equal treatment. Think about the classic image of Lady Justice with balanced scales. 

To be fair, the more I think about the big idea of justice the more I see how it is rarely if ever seen in human history. In fact, it seems that perfect justice is uniquely an aspect of God's own character. It assumes God's perspective of God's good creation, and especially of humanity. Another Bible word that refers to fairness or justice is "righteousness." We know that God is perfectly righteous and we are not. "All have...fallen short." 

At the same time, the reality of perfect justice as a core characteristic of the Creator's holy nature presents the promise of justice. If it is a core characteristic of God, it is a core value in God's Kingdom. Wherever God is ruling and reigning, to that degree there will be justice. As citizens of God's Kingdom we are commanded to advocate for God's justice in every situation. We are spokespersons for God's justice and sensitive to evidences of injustice around us. Consider these words from Scripture:

"Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly" (Leviticus 19:15).

"The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern" (Proverbs 29:7).

"Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow" (Isaiah 1:17).

"He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God" (Micah 6:8).

And then of course there are the words of Jesus:

"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled" (Matthew 5:6).

"But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well" (Matthew 6:33).

Just as sin/unrighteousness/injustice is both individual and corporate, personal and societal, so righteousness/justice is both personal and societal. We are seeking the righteous rule of King Jesus in both spheres of life. 

One of my heroes, a prophetic voice in his generation, is Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. One of his famous sayings is a quote from Theodore Parker: "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." While that certainly is a beautiful dream, it doesn't match with history. My conclusion is simply this: Perfect justice will not be seen in the world; however, perfect justice is a foundational theme of God's Righteous Rule. As subjects of King Jesus, justice is not only our dream, it is our passionate desire and commitment. Kingdom disciples are constant advocates of justice, and we are committed to "speaking truth to power" when we witness injustice. Unfortunately, rather than exposing and rebuking it, all too often American Christians seem to be on the side of injustice. 

As Americans we are optimistic realists. We are not shocked when we see injustice in the world. But we are also representatives of Christ's Kingdom, an embassy of righteousness in the midst of unrighteousness, painting a picture of the justice that is to come and that is already to be modeled by Christ's Kingdom community. After all, if we will hunger and thirst after righteousness, we have been promised that we will be filled. 

Shepherding In a Revival

This week I posted a reminder on my Facebook page - a reminder that it was 20 years ago that the Body of Christ experienced a major, worldwide, church-transforming visitation of God's Spirit. Historically these kinds of spiritual awakenings happen about once every 20-40 years. Every generation needs its own revival and we have a generation on the scene (the "Millennials") who have not experienced their own corporate encounter with God in this way. 

I suppose it's necessary to define "revival." Here's the one I have always preferred: "Revival is a sovereign move of God's Spirit that results in permanent change in the church." Individuals, local churches, and even regions, experience "revival" from time to time. Worldwide, Body of Christ transforming revivals only happen once in a generation.

After posting that reminder, along with the suggestion that it might be time for us to begin interceding for the next generational visitation, a friend of mine in Portland reminded me that revivals can be messy. Here is what he wrote:

"While we desperately need the holy spirit moving in our midst, as someone in their late teens during this 'outpouring' 20 years ago, there was as much damage and confusion during this season too. No public discernment from leadership, if it was weird it seemed to have the approval and the more bizarre was apparently more anointed. So many in my generation have shut the door and are closed off to the holy spirit moving because of no strong voices of discernment in Portland. I know people who were genuinely touched and ministered to by the spirit, but I know even more who left confused and disillusioned even walking away from the church."

Since I was there, participating in providing pastoral leadership during the revival, it seems important that I communicate the questions and struggles we experienced during that time. I remember asking us: When is some kind of spiritual experience the result of the activity of the Holy Spirit, a human learned (or stimulated response), or a combination of both? If most experiences are in fact both Spirit and spirit, when do they become genuinely distracting if not problematic? Is it possible to be so careful about nothing being "in the flesh" that we quench the Spirit? The bigger questions for me were: If someone has a unique experience with the Spirit, what does it mean? Why did that happen? Was it just charismatic entertainment for bored Christians? And even more importantly, if the church is experiencing a generational visitation of God's Spirit, how might the church be permanently changed as a result? What differences should we be able to observe on the other side of the "wave"?

Since I taught "Church History" at Portland Bible College at the time my referents were historical revivals. I was especially helped by the writings of Jonathan Edwards. Edwards was a prominent pastoral leader in what became known as the Great Awakening (1734-1739), a revival so powerful in its effect it changed not only Body of Christ worldwide but also the American colonies. During those years Edwards thought long and hard about the true nature and purpose of revival. He published "The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Holy Spirit" in 1741, in which he discussed "the bodily effects" of an unusual move the Spirit. In fact, the "swoonings, outcries and convulsions" described by Edwards were a common phenomena of all such visitations, in Edwards past and in all future revivals. It was simply true (and easily understood) that the Holy Spirit could move on someone in a way that might overpower the human emotions and body. However, they were incidental and not the marks of revival. 

But at the end of that period some of those who had participated in the revival spun off into bizarre conclusions and practices. Some had concluded that these "bodily effects" were to be permanent experiences in the church, others that they were a mark of salvation, that if you didn't periodically swoon, you were either "hard to receive" or perhaps not among the elect at all. Some began to practice "free love" and form new, unorthodox sectarian groups. As a result, in 1746, Edwards published his famous work, "Religious Affections," in which he taught that the permanent result of revival was to be the rule of God's love, pure and holy, in every part of life, individually and corporately.

So while we pray for revival, it is essential that we pray for discernment. But even importantly, that we pray for the grace to embrace all the ways in which God needs to transform his Kingdom community. There is no question that the church, including the American church, needs revival. And we are desperate to see a new generation have their own encounter with the Living God. Will it be messy? Probably. But if we keep focused on the work of the Holy Spirit among us, measured by the truth of God's Word, accessing wisdom from past revivals, I believe we will be able to receive the grace God has for us and move forward into God's preferred future for his people. 

Obsessed With Jesus

There seems to be so many concerns and crises all around us these days. It's easy to get worried and distracted about so many things. It sounds like the story of Mary and Martha: "You are worried and upset about many things" (Luke 10:41). It seems like all we hear is bad news. We live in the midst of paralyzing conflict and hostility.

Being aware of concerns is one thing; becoming obsessed with a concern is something else. Earlier today Lynda (my wife) reminded me of a mutual friend back in the Jesus People days. The Vietnam War was on and young people our age were being drafted and forced to fight in a war they were convinced was pointless (if not illegal and unjust). Our friend was a committed follower of Jesus, but over time became so obsessed with the war that she eventually stopped following Jesus. A concern had become a distraction and finally an obsession. 

We have so many opportunities to obsess over serious concerns these days:

• Obsess over terrorists
• Obsess over racial discrimination and injustice
• Obsess over the safety and security of the modern state of Israel
• Obsess over global warming
• Obsess over pornography
• Obsess over the shrinking middle class and economic injustice
• Obsess over unequal opportunities in education
• Obsess over the immorality of abortion
• Obsess over the immorality of homosexual behaviors (including marriage)
• Obsess over human trafficking and the sexual exploitation of children
• Obsess over a broken judicial system
• Obsess over a broken political system
• Obsess over the divorce rate
• Obsess over the political "right"
• Obsess over the political "left"

These obsessions have their merit. And everyone who has an obsessions insists that we share it - or there is something seriously wrong with us! And there's really no end to it. Just when we feel safe, the media will identify yet another reason to obsess and be filled with fear. (Except in Washington and Colorado where they have found an alternative obsession.)

All these reasons to worry have brought to mind the fascinating store of Jesus and three of his disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration. You may recall that Peter, James and John accompanied Jesus up onto a high mountain, and while they were there, the glory of the Lord covered them and the divine identity of Jesus was more fully revealed. Not only that, Moses and Elijah appeared and had a discussion with Jesus "about his departure," i.e., his coming death in Jerusalem. When it looked like they were about to leave, Peter suggested they build three shelters - for Jesus, Moses and Elijah. (Maybe in that way they would agree to stick around a little longer.) Surely this situation called for focused attention, for significant effort. If they took their focus off of this situation they would lose a perfectly good opportunity to be with three very important (and obviously heavenly) men.

I love what the story records next. (1) A voice spoke out of the cloud of glory saying, "This is my son whom I have chosen; listen to him." The Father is very clear in defining their focus for them. They are not to be distracted by the bright lights and the important people. Their priority is to listen to Jesus. (2) Immediately afterward, "they found that Jesus was alone" (Luke 9:28-36). When the excitement of the moment had passed, the only one left was Jesus. 

It is so important to find a correct focus for this brief life of ours. If that focus is to be Jesus, then we are dependent on him to give us his perspective on other issues he may want us to address and work for. It's not up to us to define the priorities of our lives. We are simply to "listen to him."

The same holds true for the church. Jesus defined our mission, our role in the world, very clearly. We are to "preach the Gospel" and to "make disciples." Yet there are so many causes clamoring for our attention. As a result, we run the risk of moving away from our role as an embassy of the Kingdom of God in the world and becoming absorbed by the most recent political or social movement. While the Holy Spirit might define a specific mission for a local church in a specific community, for the church to remain salt and light, those assignments must never lose sight of The Assignment. In the end, we will not be judged by whether or not we came down on the right side of a political issue but by whether or not we were faithful to point the world toward the righteous rule of King Jesus!

It Happens In Every Generation

Recently I had a conversation with a young friend of mine that began with the statement, "I've decided to not call myself a 'Christian.'" He said he had looked up the word "Christian" in wikipedia and found this definition: "It is used as a label to identify people who associate with the cultural aspects of Christianity, irrespective of personal religious beliefs or practices." While he has a clear commitment to Jesus, he didn't want to be identified with all of the religious trappings. And so he's decided to call himself a "believer." I told him the early believers simply called themselves "disciples." They were the personal apprentices of Jesus, participating in his kingdom mission on earth.

I've found this to be a fairly common conversation with a "millennial." People have been grinding their teeth about the obvious lack of religious commitment on the part of those born between 1981 and 2001. A fairly large chunk of them have chosen to not identify with "Christianity," to declare that their religious affiliation is "none." Their willingness to identify with the institutional aspects of the church is waning. They declare that they are "spiritual" but not "religious." And so we worry that they may end up abandoning Jesus. But is that what is really happening?

From 1967 to 1972 young members of my "Baby Boomer" generation decided to follow Jesus. We were "Jesus People" or "Jesus Freaks." We declared that our faith was not at all about religion but was about relationship. We reacted to the religious expressions of our parents' generation, and we worked to pioneer new expressions of the church (many of which have since become institutionalized). Sound familiar?

And then came the young people we called "Gen X" or more rudely, "Baby Busters." They were the "fatherless generation." They seemed to be a reactionary generation, "Gen X" itself being an anti-label label. They were irreligious, casting aside anything that might be "traditional," transforming Sunday morning worship services into rock-and-roll concerts. Some began to call them the "lost generation." Leaders among them referred to themselves as the "Joshua generation." One generation reacting to that of their parents, exploring their own expressions and experiences of faith.

In a recent issue of Christianity Today, yet another article about millennials told the story of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (one of my earliest influences as a Jesus Freak) as a youth pastor in his generation. It appears as though a youth movement in Europe had a resulted in a generation that just left home, wandering aimlessly around the countryside, trying to "find themselves." This youth movement began in 1880 and continued into the next generation, resulting in the need for pastoral leaders to reflect on the best way to provide leadership to this bunch of hippies. The answer was, tell them about Jesus. Present the opportunity to follow Jesus and to accept the mission of representing Jesus in all of life.

And so it's simply true: It happens in every generation. In fact, it's always been true that the church is a one-generation church. Every generation needs it's own understanding of Jesus and his mission on the earth. Every generation needs it own expression of faith. Every generation needs its own revival. God has always worked generationally. God has a distinct plan and purpose for each generation, including the millennial generation. 

So for those who are wringing their hands about this generation abandoning Christianity, just tell them about Jesus, the Jesus mission and the Jesus community. I have found that, as a generation, authenticity and community are more important to them than they were for our generation. They are positioned to be another "great generation," in our nation and in the church. And try not to mess it up with a lot of religiousity and churchiosity. 

Who Is Really In Control?

Recently I read the story of an Army Chaplain who had lost his faith. He served the troops in Iraq shortly after the invasion of 2003, witnessing the horrors of war. When he got home he discovered that his marriage had exploded in his absence. He concluded that God, who could have prevented any or all of this, was cruel and immoral, that God was not love, that God did not care. And so he gave up any real faith in God or a desire to serve God.

The story brought up the old question of "theodicy" and the sovereignty of God. What does is really mean when we say that God is control? And what difference does it make?

For some, the sovereignty of God amounts to little more than philosophical determinism. It's just really a matter of fate. What will be will be. Human free will and choice are illusions. Everything that happens is simply a matter of God's sovereign will. Therefore, we are not really accountable - no matter what we do, we will in the end live out God's irresistible plan for our lives.

For others, God himself is still learning, growing. Nothing is pre-determined. The future is what we make of it. Although God has overall authority in God's creation, he has set it up so that he is not (and can not be) in control of the details along the way - just final destinations. 

The problem for us - as is often the truth - is that the Bible can be used to justify both of these positions. Since the Bible is not a collection of philosophical principles but rather the story of God's purpose for and interaction with God's creation, you can't settle a philosophical argument with Scripture. 

The fact is this: When the Bible says that "God is love," it teaches us that God is a personal, relational, dynamic, interactive God. The divine characteristic of "love" determines everything God does and the way God does it. We are not pieces on God's chessboard, and we are not living in self-determined chaos. Or as Albert Einstein once said, "God does not play dice with the world." At the very least, the sovereignty of God means that God has the first word and God has the last word, and that God personally and relationally oversees the process in between. And yes, we do make real choices along the way. 

Which brings up the subject of "faith." You would think our understanding of faith would be fairly simple, but it is one of the most debated ideas in Christianity. Your perspective on the sovereignty of God will literally determine how you define "faith," and how that works out in your life. For some, faith is simple trust and acceptance of God's sovereign will. For others, faith is the metaphysical force God uses to work, and by learning the proper ways of saying things (and perhaps visualizing things), we can use that same force to get God to work in the way that seems best. 

The fact is this: faith is the ability to trust God, no matter what. Faith also involves the powerful, dynamic, personal ability to discern God's will in a situation, and by agreeing with God, see God's will actually accomplished. Faith is a human response, but faith is also the gift of God. However, faith is never a process we initiate or control. Faith is always our response to God's initiative. There is not a magic method guaranteed to work every time. We may have our favorite methods (of prayer, confession, etc.), but the sovereignty of God means that God always has the last word. God alone gets to choose when it works and when it does not work. Any attempt on the part of human beings to be in control of the process is magic, not faith. If God is not in control, then God is not God.

So my question for the Army chaplain is this: What would you have God do? Do you want God to reprogram the minds of the political leaders so that we could never go to war? Would you want God do simply destroy all the enemies of the American Army? What if God placed an angelic shield over all of the American troops so that bullets and bombs simply bounced off of them? If all of God's works and all of God's methods are relational, designed to facilitate opportunities for men and women to be reconciled to him, and for the reconciled to grow in Christllikeness, what would be the best way for God to work in a situation? 

Fortunately, the end of the story for our Army chaplain includes his own healing, restoration with a new family, and a return to Christian vocational ministry. In the end, he learned something new about God and something new about faith. It reminds me of Psalm 73. Read it and share your thoughts with me.