Meaningless Triviality

Such is the way of Christendom. Take up our crosses and follow Jesus as we take on ourselves the mental anguish associated with apologetic work or arduous debate with other believers. We've reversed the importance of mental acuity and the importance of obedience. I come from a homeschooling background and within this sphere/sub-culture there exists potential for great feats within the public realm of discourse (namely, the meaningless circus known as politics or media culture) mostly because homeschooled kids have a ton of mental agility and think well. It's drilled into us in some of the more popular curriculum and in our obsession with things like TeenPact and debate clubs. I come from this background and am slowly learning, albeit very slowly, the impotence of these discourses on eschatology and whether or not paedobaptism is biblical or not.

  Now, I admit. I enjoy a good discussion. And the bible is to be dealt with in community and some of these debates and arguments are fun. But where in the bible do we find a debate on the most inane of topics? Nowhere. Yes, St. Paul (primarily), in his letters calls out fools and people who would do damage to the Church but then goes on to teach those churches how to live in this world. Jesus doesn't give two rips if you're a Calvinist, Pelagian or not. In fact, while doctrinal orthodoxy (which is too often a phrase for "fortress theology") is important (doctrine does motivate and move when presented right), the importance of praxis is being undermined. Sure, Reformed folk of the theonomic stripe argue for the "Regulative Principle of Worship" which basically is a how to guide for worship from the bible, but most times the bible doesn't care for specific on how you embody the way of Jesus. In fact, the bible is more concerned that you actually do embody the Way and learn. 

  Look. All this is coming from the mouth of a guy whose probably going to major in philosophy in college. I love arguing, discussing, and debating trivial things. But it's becoming apparent to me that unless those seemingly trivial ideas can become practiced then I am basically blowing steam into an area of nada. If it cannot be practiced it is, almost always, an meaningless waste of time.  

Glory, Abused

The glory of God is the new Law. No longer are we enslaved to the Law of death. At the present we are enslaved to the Law of glory. Whatever one does is to be done to and for God's glory and instead it turns into a vicious cycle of guilt and demand. The death of Jesus speaks to us now, forming us, with the realization that on the cross God has already been glorified. In partaking of the cross (through Eucharist and Baptism and faith) we find ourselves partaking in the once and final act of glorifying God, the last need to do so has been placated and filled full. We are free to live in grace and folly.

On Exchange

Previously I began to address the radical nature of law vs. gospel within the scriptural context. But, did not set out any nuance (mainly because I am not fond of nuance-ing everything). This post is an attempt at that.

If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

Not only did death come via the Law but perfection could not be attained through it. The Law was created to pass away. 

For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also.

The priesthood is no longer with Aaron and his heirs but is now with Melchizedek and his heir. And with this heir there comes a change in the Law. But saying the Law has changed seems okay. It's kosher within Christian circles to say the nature of the Law changed but isn't set aside. Yet, the bible leaves us no room for the comfortable. 

The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless...

The Law was created to pass because it is weak and useless. The goal was perfection and the Law was useless in achieving this goal. Ergo, it has to pass. 

...and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

This hope is one of an indestructible life. Again, the tension of death vs. life. Death in and by the Law and life in and by Christ. 

Through whom we live and move and have our being. 

Love - Antithesis

Love is kind - "I wanna kill people so I'm gonna join special ops," guy at school.

Love does not dishonor others - "God hates fags," Westboro Baptist Church.

Love keeps no record of wrongs - "We will never forgive, we will never forget," Anonymous.

Love is patient - "Come quickly Lord Jesus."

On the Abuse of Truth

I feel bad for truth. It's been so abused of late. And more, I feel anger at Churches. There's this mentality that biblical faithfulness should trump all. "I want to be faithful to the bible," and the statement which underlies that one is this, "so I'll trumpet the biblical text from the rooftops exactly how it's stated therein." No, no, no. Can I say it any more clearly?

We, as Christians, tend to treat the lifestyles or actions we call sin as if they are some abstract idea/entity/thing/whatever that has taken hold of some group of people. This is where the problem lies. We, too often, tend to address the sins of people (when we also fail to have a clear, and effective definition of sin) without realizing they're still (shocker) human. They have feelings, emotions, reactions, thoughts, desires. They feel pain. The reason why people become so outraged at Christian ideals and call us bigots is because we forget their humanness in the desire to be faithful to a book.

Last I checked Christ calls us to be gracious in our speech. He wants us to speak with truth and grace. When we fail to speak truth with grace, in some ways, we fail to speak truth at all. It becomes a clanging noise. Just empty words which we shout in the name of biblical faithfulness and, therefore, words without meaning.