Live your theology.

I had the opportunity to read an advance copy of Jonathan Weyer’s upcoming book The Faithful.  The book itself is a fun & compelling piece of Christian horror (an emerging genre, I’m told).  It’s a ghost story written from the perspective of a young reformed Presbyterian pastor.   An interesting conversation in the book deals with a passage from Deuteronomy:

“When you come into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD. And because of these abominations the LORD your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God, for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do this.   (Deuteronomy 18:9-14 ESV)

A character in the book then suggests that these things are forbidden, because they are real.  Necromancy is something that can be pursued, wickedly mind you, but should be left alone by the command of God.  So while there’s a standing order in Scripture not to actively pursue such things, the Bible is silent about what to do if ghosts reach out to you.  It’s an interesting thought, and one that works well in the book.

I think on this topic every time I read the Biblical account of the witch of En-dor communicating with what appeared to the ghost of Samuel (1 Samuel 28:6-19).

So what’s your opinion on ghosts?  No such thing? Demonic manifestations?  If you’re a denier, is there  a biblical reason you believe this?  Is the denial of ghosts a reflection of a hyper-materialistic society?

Oh, that whole Glenn Beck not-a-political-rally-nor-a-doctrinal-rally rally over the weekend wherein he called people back to God and/or Jesus.

The satirical twitter account @XIANITY chimed “BREAKING NEWS: After months of resisting, lone hold-out American Evangelical receives Glenn Beck as his lord & savior.”

For a more substantial analysis let me refer you to Russell Moore’s post.  Mark from HereIblog.com does a nice job of detailing the differences of the Mormon Jesus and the actual Jesus over here.

My thoughts:

• The idea that we need to go back to God so that the USA will be wonderful again is rubbish.  If your reason for serving Him who is Holy, Holy, Holy is to achieve a better tax code, prayer in school, & Republicans in every office… there’s a good chance you are unaware of who God is.
• Speaking of not knowing who God is, this is pretty much a case study in what happens when we care more about an idea of God than God himself.  Not sure how else to explain the hip-hip-hooraying when someone throws Jesus’ name around when that name is blasphemed by a doctrine of Jesus that paints him as a created lesser God conceived through Spiritual procreation (along with the his brother Satan).
• This is why an American flags hoisted up near the pulpit has always made me uncomfortable.
• This sort of thing is the conservative equivalent of the social gospel.

Brief and undeveloped, to be sure.  What are your thoughts on the issue?  Are you as uncomfortable as I am?  Do you marvel at the number of people demanding a return to God who won’t take the time to actually look into what God has said about himself?  Has hyper-republicanism in the church set this in motion?

Mark Driscoll wrote an article on the predominant tendency of boys to just stop maturing and never become men.  They become guys instead.  Michael Kimmel wrote a book called Guyland about this very issue.  It’s worth reading if you’ve ever found yourself wondering how we reached a point where the High School graduates (regardless of whether they’re class of ’89 or ’09) still act like they never left.  A generation of Woodersons if you follow my meaning.

Driscoll talks about the various manifestations of the guys, paying some attention to guys (read: neither boys nor men) in church:

Men in the Church: Cowards and Complainers

What happens if you walk into the church and try to find out what a man looks like? First of all, you’re not going to find a lot of guys in most evangelical churches. The least likely person to see in church is a single, twenty-something male. He is as rare at church as a vegan at a steak house.

In the world, boys who can shave are children who are consumers. In the church, boys who can shave are cowards who are complainers.

A buddy of mine calls them evangellyfish because they have no backbone. They don’t declare a major, church, theology, or fiancé. They don’t want to fail and they think if they don’t try, then they can’t fail. And by definition, that’s a failure.

They are, however, endowed with the spiritual gift of complaining. They say, “I hate the church. The church just wants my money.” As if the church wants his futon, Xbox, light beer, and computer filled with free Internet porn.

Here’s the cold hard truth: it’s a lot harder to do something than it is to complain about those who are doing something. The notorious sin of Christian guys is complaining about guys who are doing something rather than doing something.

I know these guys.  They’re not exact replicas of the guy Driscoll is writing about, but there are similarities.  Especially the points about complaining and avoiding marriage.  You can read the entire article here.  Tell me what your elf-eyes see about this.

I was thumbing through Cotton Mather’s A Family Well Ordered and I came across this:

Parents, with a sweet authority over your children, rebuke them for and restrain them from everything that may prove prejudicial to their salvation.

The charge to restrain them from “everything that may prove prejudicial to their salvation” is pretty loose.  My question to you is: What are we as Christians failing to restrain our children from that we ought to be?  Is it public schools? Home schools? Irrelevant preaching? An anemic gospel?

Let me know in the comment section below.  I’ll choose one commenter at random to win a copy of Mather’s book on Friday.

For example, as I explain in the book, research suggests that one of the factors that contributes to whether or not young people stay active in church after high school is intergenerational relationships. The students who have more and deeper relationships with adults other than their parents are much more likely to remain in the church in college and beyond. Now, smaller congregations offer tons of opportunity for developing these intergenerational relationships. But the hallmark of large churches is age-segmented ministry, programs designed to separate children from youth, youth from adults, young adults from seniors. When small churches imitate this model, they undercut their advantage for fostering intergenerational relationships. — Brandon O’Brien author of The Strategically Small Church

HT: Ed Stetzer