Thanks class of 2010:

It was my privilege, yesterday, to speak to a fine group of young adults in honor of their graduation from high school. In our area there is a tradition of long standing called a Baccalaureate Service. The term may mean other things in other places, but here it is a fairly formal gathering--at this one the graduates wore their caps & gowns and I put on my "marrying and burying" suit--for the purpose of offering spiritual input, and asking Divine favor on the occasion of this important step ahead. Decades ago these affairs were planned by the schools; it was kind of like graduation was a two step process. Now school systems can't force students to do anything religious, so baccalaureates are student run, and attendance is voluntary. I find that very impressive.A group of young people planned the service I participated in. They planned the program. They invited the singers and the preacher. By my informal count, a few more than half the class came, together with a number of parents, grandparents and assorted relatives and friends. I'm not sure how much effect my message had on these young scholars. I know that their invitation, attendance, and attention were a great encouragement to me.Thanks guys!And for the rest of you, I hope it gives some hope. It's STTA.

There are a couple of really strange statements the Lord Jesus made. He said several times that if you tried to keep your life that you would lose it. (Matthew 16:25, Luke 17:33) He also said something that makes no sense if you are running a race--"But many who are first will be last, and the last, first."" (Mark 10:31)
My son sent me a sports story that gives us a taste of the concepts the Lord was speaking about. An incredibly successful girl's high-school softball team found itself playing a team that didn't even know how to play the game. What should have happened, by the usual standards, was for the "Invincibles" to score the requisite runs for the "slaughter rule" and then go our for pizza, leaving the underlings to nurse their wounds and go home eating bag lunches in a quiet bus. They couldn't help it, they were just better than the other team. Claim the win. A victory is a victory. To the victor go the spoils. Quote the Vince man. "Winning isn't the main thing. Winning is the only thing!"
I don't know exactly how the idea came to them but the clear winners in this contest decided to do something different. They would lose so they could win something better. They didn't throw the game--that would have been demeaning to the team with inferior skills. Instead they decided to use the couple of hours it would normally take to play a game to hold a clinic to teach the inexperienced team to play better. In order to get the winning and losing thing out of the way, they forfeited.
I'd like to interview one of these young women twenty-five years from now. "Tell me about the most memorable softball game you ever played." I would ask. Somehow I think the answer will start, "Let me tell you about the game we forfeited when we could have won throwing wrong handed, and batting with broomsticks.
By willingly being last, these women clearly finished ahead--not of their competitors but in front of all expectation. By willingly releasing that to which they had a clear right, they received more than they could have imagined.
You can read the whole story here.
If it works in a game, just think what can be accomplished if we apply these principles in life.
It's STTA.

Life?

Dr. Craig Venter just achieved a remarkable scientific breakthrough. According to his press release, He produced the "first self-replicating species we've had on the planet whose parent is a computer." (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/science/21cell.html)
Others with impressive credentials, though, say though his achievement may be impressive, his press release is considerably overblown. "That said, this is not the creation of artificial life. The scientists have used an existing cell as the vehicle for the new genome. And the medium in which they synthesized what they produced was live yeast cells in which they created their new artificial chromosomes to inject into live host bacteria cells."
(http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-dr-venters-research-has-thrilling-possibilities-1979991.html)
News articles heralded the experiment as the creation of an artificial life-form.
It reminds me of an old joke. A group of scientists and the Lord were having a contest related to the creation of life. The Lord took a handful of dirt, formed it into the shape of a human-being, and breathed into its nostrils the breath of life. The Lord added a suit of clothes and the new creation sat down to watch the rest of the proceedings. The scientists started to gather up some dirt for their turn. The Lord looked at them, shook His head and said, "Uh uh, create your own dirt."
Only God makes something from nothing.
While Venter actually came short of creating life, he did serve to illustrate that life is incredibly complex--certainly not the product of infinite chance.

It's STTA.

Overuse of the passive:

"I'm sorry this happened."

It is the most recent in a stream of confessions from that flows from the glitterati of our culture, almost as impressively as the oil spewing into Gulf. I can't totally condemn these confessions. If I knew for sure that they are what they appear to be--public relations damage control, and attempts to save or recover the flow of money--I'd be more categorical and forceful. I'll leave the matter of sincerity for another day. My point, or beef, today is that it didn't just happen. It almost never does, and if it did just happen, no confession would be in order. She did it!

Compare the typically lame celebrity confession with the words of the utterly broken King of Israel
in Psalm 51.

I'm not promoting a new order of flagellants. I am reminding all of us--few of whom will ever confess sin on network TV--that honesty, even brutal honesty is appropriate when it comes to dealing with sin. The word "confess" in 1 John literally means to say the same thing. When we confess in the Biblical sense we agree with God about our sin, and the last time I checked, He doesn't excuse it.

It's STTA

I'm Thinking About Staying Married:

Tara Parker-Pope, according to a recent Time Magazine article challenges the long-held, much-quoted statistic that half of all marriages in the US end in divorce. Her book may identify some segments of society doing better than 50%, but, according to other authorities, she doesn't slay the Divorce-Dragon. "Penn State sociologist Paul Amato . . . . writes that the half-of-all-marriages-end-badly figure still "appears to be reasonably accurate." (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1989124,00.html#ixzz0oZ7aJlXl)Far more important than figuring the staying together average for the nation is actually staying married as a couple. "Parker-Pope argues, all the talk about grim marriage stats becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. "It makes us ambivalent and more vulnerable to giving up when problems occur,"(http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1989124,00.html)Yeah!We have created a culture in which divorce is seen as being as acceptable as ordering coffee without cream. Two things happen when a culture says something is bad: It makes people, who care about the cultural voices, feel bad if they violate the cultural more.Because of #1, it will bring about a lessening of the frequency of the bad behavior.
I fear that, combined with an over-emphasis on self-image, so called, we have so focused on the first result (above) that we have forfeited the second. I don't have a study to back up my statement, but, as a pastor, I have seen marriages that work and those that have failed. In my humble opinion we want a culture that encourages people to stay married. Parents, when you and your children hear about the divorce of an acquaintance--maybe the parents of your child's schoolmate, take a minute and reflect on the loss. Help create a bias toward staying married. All of us can refuse to treat the marital-breakups of the rich and famous as just another piece of gossip-news.More than anything, those of us who are married can push down the divorce average, and lead the way. Most likely it is good for us, and it benefits those who are watching. 'til death do us part.It's STTA

How many Theologians does it take to unscrew the inscrutable?

Dr. Joseph Pinter, my Theology prof. in College used to joke about trying to "unscrew the inscrutable." Doc. I could use a little extra torque. I've been reading and thinking about the incarnation of the Son of God, in particular the kenosis. The Bible gives us straight-forward information--"The Word (referring to Christ) became flesh ." (incarnation, John 1:14) "Christ Jesus . . . emptied Himself." (kenosis, Philippians 2:5-7) For 400 years Theologians labored to adequately express in one statement what they saw, concerning this, presented throughout the New Testament. In 451 at the Council of Chalcedon, the assembled delegates agreed that Jesus Christ is one person, "the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledge in two natures [Divine and human], without confusion, without change, witout division, or separation . . ."
A contemporary Theolog, Millard Erickson, points out that the statement is essentially negative. "It tells us what 'two natures in one person' does not mean."* There is good reason for the learned, ancient scholars to be so nay-saying. We are dealing with something beyond us. After eight pretty tight pages, Erickson admits, "we may have difficulty specifying exactly the content of this doctrine."**
If I can be allowed to hang out in such learned company for a moment, I'll add my two cents. "If God couldn't do anything that I couldn't understand, He wouldn't be much of a God, would He?"
I'm still twisting. Though my progress in understanding is minimal, my advance in appreciation is great. "God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son . . . " (John 3:16).

It's STTA.

* **Erickson, M. (1985). Christian Theology. (730 & 738). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Doing my part means telling the truth--I have no part!

I don't want to get in a fight--at least not today--if you can identify who I'm talking about, and want to take a cyber-swing, you can go squabble on your own webspace,
No one will ever go wrong overestimating how ridiculous some of the statements made in commencement speeches are. They probably contain more cliches, and lame sentimentalism per minute than any other form of communication.
Recently, though, before a group of graduates who ought to know better, and a faculty who clearly does, a speaker spoke of the atonement as a combination of God doing His thing and me doing mine. God, of course, will uphold His part . . .
OK, we need atonement--not in the sappy, tie-your-running-shoes-tighter-and-get-going kind of way, but in the sense of realizing that I am a sinner, and there is nothing that I by myself can do about it, but, "Praise God! Christ did." You might want to see what the word "atonement" means in the Biblical sense. Easton's Bible Dictionary says, "Christ's mediatorial work and sufferings are the ground or efficient cause of reconciliation with God. They rectify the disturbed relations between God and man, taking away the obstacles interposed by sin." (read more)
Yes, we need atonement--THE ATONEMENT, the work Christ did on the cross making possible our receiving forgiveness, and new life, and heaven, and more.
Read more about how this can be yours here.

It's STTA.