The need for a deep knowledge of God

I have been studying the early chapters of Isaiah recently (Our current homegroup Bible studies are in Isaiah, as is our assistant pastor’s current sermon series.) I have been particularly struck by the depth of Isaiah’s vision of God – in His self-sufficiency, His sovereignty over all the nations of the world, His awesome purposes in judgment and salvation.

I have been struck by how vital it is that we know God, that we approach in some measure the depth of Isaiah’s own vision. Only a deep knowledge of God will sustain us in whatever trials may lie ahead of us in our lives (as individuals, families and churches). Only a deep knowledge of God will empower us for persevering obedience and service. Only a deep knowledge of God will lift our eyes from ourselves, and give us the desire to see His glory.

This morning our assistant pastor preached on Isaiah 6. Here are some further reflections on knowing God, drawn from Craig’s sermon:

- We need the right kind of knowledge of God; not the kind of me-centred knowledge that superficially acknowledges God but in reality treats Him as someone who can meet our needs, help fulfil our aspirations; someone who can be manipulated. True knowledge of God makes us realise how radically God-centred the universe is, and how radically God-centred we need to be.

- Nor is true knowledge of God a mere knowing about, an intellectualism that finds God a fascinating object of study but is not moved to obedience and godly fear and love.

- But true knowledge of God leads us to recognition of the huge distance between ourselves and Him – not merely the sheer ontological distance between the finite and the infinite, but primarily the moral distance between a pure, holy God and me – polluted, corrupted, disfigured by sin. The six woes of Isaiah 5, denouncing the utter corruption of the people of Judah, are followed by a seventh in Isaiah 6:5. “Woe is me”, declares Isaiah, “for I am a man of unclean lips and I live among a people of unclean lips”

- But that vision of God’s holiness and recognition of our sinfulness then leads in Isaiah’s case to the reality of forgiveness. To know God is to know oneself sinful but forgiven, polluted but cleansed, alienated but reconciled. A knowledge of God without the experience of personal forgiveness is not a true knowledge of God. So whereas the six woes of chapter 5 are interspersed with warnings of God’s certain judgment on their unrepentance, Isaiah’s confession is followed by cleansing: “your guilt is taken away and your sin atoned for.” There is no true knowledge of God that has not come to the Cross.

- Finally, to know God is to be ready to serve Him. To know God in his holiness, and experience his cleansing of our sin-stained lives, is to then be commissioned to live for His glory. A knowledge of God that does not issue in obedience and service is not true knowledge.

Reader! – these things may or may not be familiar to you, but if they are, be refreshed in your desire to know God better; persevere in pursuing God Himself. For we can drift, we can lose our focus; we can become consumed by fears and insecurities. At least I know I can, and have. I have needed a reminder of these vital truths. And perhaps you do too.



Note: Craig’s sermons on Isaiah can be found here. Please note, this is the temporary download page for Beeston Free Church. The sermons on Isaiah are the following files:
20070114am.mp3 (Isaiah 1)
20070121am.mp3 (Isaiah 2)
20070128am.mp3 (Isaiah 6)

Book Influences

Preamble
I recently reorganised our bookshelves. I have two shelves directly above the PC, and 4 more on the opposite wall behind me. The rest are then relegated upstairs. I have tried various systems for organising my books in the past, and none has particularly been helpful. This time, I decided to use one of my key shelves for biblical commentaries, and the second for my "favourite books", those books which have been of particular influence for one reason or another over the years, and to which I return from time to time.

That prompted me to consider what books (and other writings) have been influential in my thinking and life. What I propose to do in some forthcoming posts is list those books, and hopefully make some brief comments on how they have influenced me. As well as being an interesting exercise, the main purpose is rather to think through what I have learned from them, to test those lessons in the light of God's Word, and to strive to continue to apply in my life those lessons that are of true value.

Comments
I welcome comments. Perhaps I list books that have influenced you too. Perhaps you are surprised by some of the entries. Perhaps you notice gaps in my reading (I certainly do!) and can suggest areas I need to look at more carefully.

Caveats
This exercise assumes the following:
(a) that the reading of books is healthy and important for Christians
(b) that while (a) is true, the reading of books must remain subordinate to the reading of the Bible
(c) that reading Christian books must not be an end in itself; it must be pursued for the sake of love not knowledge, for "knowledge puffs up but love builds up"

For some extremely helpful posts on reading, see the dozen or so posts on the Together 4 the Gospel blog, during January and February 2006.

The moral goodness of business 2

On my previous post on Grudem's book Business for the Glory of God, étrangère asked...

"Would it be good also for someone convinced that business is glorifying to God and whose church is pushing that God's inheritance for us includes material blessing to be pursued through business? Does it address or would it inadvertently confound that false teaching?"

Here's my reply:

Hi Rosemary,

I find that question quite difficult to answer, which is why it's taken me a couple of weeks! Grudem does not address that particular brand of teaching. His aim is quite modest. It is not, for example, “a book on ‘how to decide the hard ethical questions in business.’” – although incidentally he is working on such a book. The aim is to affirm the moral goodness of various aspects of business activity. I suppose then that it is written to persuade Christians who either think that business is morally dubious or who are not sure, uncertain whether Christians can engage in business with a clean conscience or not. In addition, it has probably been written to encourage Christians involved in business that their activities can be used to glorify God, and to encourage them to do so.

I think that the book does present an alternative (and better!) Christian vision of business than the view that teaches that God wants to bless our wallets etc. For one thing, the emphases are God-centred and other-centred.

But whether this would be a good book for someone in the situation to describe to read, well, I think that depends. Books can be misread, can’t they? Iain Murray, for example, has expressed dismay that his book The Puritan Hope has, in his view, been misused by certain people to back up a certain kind of postmillenialism related to theonomy.1 Business for the Glory of God could be read without due care and used to bolster one’s own ‘health and wealth gospel’. As I say, Grudem is not aiming to correct that particular error. However, read thoughtfully and with help from someone else, the book could be profitable for a person in your scenario. It may help destroy false dichotomies. If the person is (a) convinced that business can be used to glorify God, (b) hears the goodness of business affirmed by those teaching a ‘wealth gospel’ (c) has heard others say that the ‘health and wealth gospel’ is unbiblical and (d) therefore associates (c) with saying that business is bad, then to hear an alternative, positive vision of business that is biblical and not about ‘material blessings are our inheritance’ could begin to drive a wedge between the conviction that business can be used to glorify God and the material wealth teaching. But this is not necessarily evident from reading Business to the Glory of God since Grudem is not addressing that issue and there would therefore probably be a need for a helpful Christian friend (you?) to help him/her think through it.

So I think Grudem here does “inadvertedly confound that false teaching”, but subtly.

Dunno if that helps; I certainly welcome further comments!

___________
1. Listen to Murray discussing the book with Mark Dever here, from approximately the 20th minute to the 25th.

Unanswered Questions

One of my big answered questions, is “what is the significance of the black-tailed godwit?” This may sound rather bizarre, but stay with me. The black-tailed godwit is a wading bird that I find particularly fascinating, but any natural phenomenon could be inserted in the question. It is my way of asking ‘why do all the wonders of the natural world exist?’ Why so much variety? Such abundance? There is a character in C.S. Lewis’ That Hideous Strength whose ideal utopia is a moonscape: away with the clutter and irregularities of nature! Poirot has these tendencies too (see the dramatised version of the Mysterious Affair at Styles). But we don’t live in a cuboid purged of ‘dirty nature’. We live in a world of such wonder, such diversity, such drama. Why? Why has God made all this? I know the answer at a simple level – it is to bring glory to God. And such a world should elicit our wonder and thanks to Him who made it all. Yet I am sure that there are depths to that answer that will take eternity to explore.

Two things I find beautiful

I was thrilled to see arctic terns in Helsinki – not the mere fact of seeing them and hence being added to my lifelist (I once read of a serial birdwatcher who watched his first azure tits (bird no. 5000-and-something on his life list) for barely 10 seconds, so eager was he to get onto the next ‘tick’) – but the delightful watching of them, the oh-so-subtle differences that distinguish it from the common tern, the way one twice dived into the water barely yards away as we were praying on the beach, the way they flew – especially the way they flew, so elegant, so graceful. What a delight! What a thrill! Praise God for the arctic tern!

Yet I experienced something even more beautiful in Helsinki, the beauty of Christian fellowship, generosity, kindness and joy. We stayed with my sister-in-law’s family for a week before and after their wedding. It was a wonderful time, an experience of the most beautiful hospitality and generosity. And the wedding too was truly Christian, saturated with joy and thankfulness. Of course, not everyone there was a Christian, but the two families were, and there was a tone to the proceedings of purity, reverence and rejoicing in the goodness of God. I am grateful for this experience.

My prayers for my brother and his wife are that God would fill their lives and their home with joy, beauty and the love of God, and that through them people may be attracted to the Lord Jesus, as their lives adorn the gospel. And I pray that for ourselves too.

Creating the beautiful. The above thoughts made me think the following, first of all in the context of our own family, but then too for the church. We have an opportunity to build something beautiful, an opportunity, through the grace of God, to build something full of joy, goodness and love, something that will bring great glory to God. Is this not, in part, what we should be seeking to do in our churches? God’s purpose is to create something beautiful – a community of people, washed from their sins, reconciled to Him, knit into deep relationships with each other, a people amongst whom love and joy and goodness flourish, a people who are – to use Mark Dever’s phrase – to be “a display of God’s glory amongst a world of human sin and suffering.”1 What an amazing project to be involved with! What a privilege to be signed up by God for it through his gracious salvation! And how great it is that God is the one who is at work and who guarantees the project’s success!

PS If anyone is reading who knows us and wants to see some photos of my bro's wedding, send me an e-mail.

1 This phrase is part of the end-script found on the 9 marks interviews series

Pride

I have been reminded recently of the awful extent of pride in my heart; how easily I gravitate towards thinking of myself more highly than I ought (Rom 12.3). And in this regard, I was deeply struck by the following thoughts:

When Solomon utters his prayer of dedication of the temple (2 Chronicles 6.12-42), there is a notable absence of pride. How easy it might have been to take pride in the construction of such a magnificent building; how easy to glory in what he and the people had done for their God, what a wonderful example of devotion to the Lord! But Solomon’s prayer does not glory in their work, but recognises their utter sinfulness before the God of heaven and their need for His forgiveness.

Carson writes:
The principal burden of what Solomon asks may be summarized quite simply. In the future, when either individual Israelites sin or the entire nation sinks into one sin or another, if they then turn away from their sin and pray toward the temple, Solomon asks that God himself will hear from heaven, and forgive their sin (6:21-39). There are [several] remarkable elements to these petitions.

First, there is an astonishingly realistic assessment of the propensity of the people to sin…

Second, however central the temple is to be as a focus for the prayers of the people (not least when they sin), God will hear their prayers not from the temple but from heaven, his dwelling-place…

Third, insofar as the temple is critical, it is seen as the center of religion and worship that deals with the forgiveness of sin and thus restores sinners to God. The heart of the temple is not the choirs and the ceremonies, but the forgiveness of sin. In this day of ill-defined spirituality, it is vital that we remember this point.[1]

How easy it is to take pride in one’s abilities, one’s achievements, one’s knowledge. Yet at the heart of true religion – of Christianity – is the stark reality of our shameful naked sinfulness before a holy God, and our sheer need of his pardon. That third point made by Carson above is thus translated into the centrality of the cross of Jesus Christ in our Christian lives. All my human pride, my pretensions, my thinking highly of myself, is stripped bare and shown to be utter filth by the cross.


[1] Carson, D.A. (1998) For the Love of God (Volume One) (Leicester: IVP), meditation for December 6th

Garry Williams on hostile history

I am inspired by Rosemary's post God loves maths. And arts. And science... to post some notes from a seminar given by Garry Williams on a Christian view of history or, more precisely on historiography, the writing of history. Williams argues that we are intrinsically historical as human beings. History is not a peripheral subject of interest to a few (out-of-date?) people, but something that shapes our understanding of the world we live in and our own identity. Consciously or not, we are all historians - we all have a view on/ an understanding of the past - and if we're not conscious of it, that probably indicates that we have by default adopted the version presented to us by our culture. As Christians, therefore, we must work to develop a Christian interpretation of history; if not we will unwittingly imbibe a non-Christian version, a version which will operate by principles that are profoundly hostile to the Lordship of Christ.

I hope to write more on history in future posts, but for now here are the said notes:

Hostile History
Garry Williams

22nd Evangelical Ministry Assembly 2005. Faith Facing Hostility.


Hostility towards Christ in the telling of history.

How we tell history is not neutral, but an arena of conflict

1) because of the extent of human depravity into all areas of human activity

history cannot properly be understood without the context of the progress of the gospel.

Pascal: “how fine it is to see with the eyes of faith, Darius and Cyrus, Alexander, the Romans, Pompei and Herod, working without knowing it for the glory of the gospel.”

history is Christian or anti-Christian history.
no facts outside of an interpretative framework
Van Til: “it is a Satanic falsehood to say that a fact is a fact to everybody alike.”

2) everybody is a historian

Despite anti-historical tendencies, “no culture can possibly continue for a moment without an articulated history.”
By telling history we define our world, and our place within the world. History is fundamental to our identity; telling history is an inalienable human activity.

all people are historians because all people are religious.
innate desire to worship, but channelled into history.


Responding to hostile history, engaging in Christian counter-history.

1) The Bible commits us to being historical creatures.
The Bible gives us an authoritative interpretation of history.

What about history beyond Acts, post-biblical history?
But the Bible embraces all of history – not in an ‘detailed end-times map’/rapture-index sense

“There is plenty of more mainstream evidence, is there not, for the reach of Scripture beyond the Acts of the Apostles in its discussion of human history. Think of the visions of Daniel, of that rock growing into a great mountain. Think of the mustard seed growing into a tree that shelters the birds, the nations, that come to nest in its branches. Think of the lump being leavened as the yeast leavens the whole. Think even of the Great Commission – making disciples of all nations. All of these are Biblical pictures of post-biblical history.”

“How we view the last 2000 years is determined by the teaching of Scripture.”

2) The Lord Jesus Christ claims total Lorship over all the earth

“The Christian religion must become the universal religion because Jesus is the universal Lord.”

3) If we don’t, we will by default pick up a non-Christian history of the world


In practice

1) self-scrutiny. What kind of history have we imbibed?
2) forming our own historical understanding. Take small steps.
3) teach historically

The full seminar can be bought from the Proclamation trust here.
You can read about Garry Williams, a lecturer at Oak Hill theological college, here.

PS. I also found the following article by Garry Williams very helpful:
Cross Purpose: replying to Steve Chalke on penal substitution.

I haven't died yet.

I am discovering that having a full-time job which involves staring at a computer screen all day, plus a baby and plenty of other responsibilities is not conducive to keeping a regular blog. If I knew that no-one read my blog then I wouldn't feel so bad, but now that my friends Mark and Dan have publicised its existence to the world, I suddenly feel a huge sense of responsibility!

Anyway, warm greetings to the both of you. And thanks for your comments! I have seriously loved reading both your blogs and I may post some comments about them on another occasion...

For now, my not-too-serious post title (intended to convey the continuing survival of this blog) reminds me that death is, in fact, an extremely serious matter. Let me briefly quote from John Piper some words that first impacted me deeply about 4 years ago:

Urging that preaching should be characterised by great seriousness and great joy, he writes,

"Direct your mind often to the contemplation of death. It is absolutely inevitable if the Lord tarries, and it is utterly momentous. Not to think on its implications for life and preaching is incredibly naive. [Jonathan] Edwards was the man he was - with depth and power (and eleven believing children!) - because of resolutions like these that he made as a young man:

"9. Resolved, To think much, on all occasions, of my dying, and of the common circumstances which attend death.

"55. Resolved, To endeavor to my utmost, so to act, as I can think I should do, if I had already seen the happiness of heaven and torments of hell.

"Every funeral I preach is a deeply sobering experience for me because I sit there before my message and imagine myself or my wife or sons or daughters in that coffin. Death and sickness have an amazing way of blowing the haze of triviality out of life and replacing it with the wisdom of gravity and gladness in the hope of resurrection joy."

[Piper, J. (2004, rev. ed.) The Supremacy of God in Preaching (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books) pp.64-65

Or compare these words of Matthew Henry (in his Commentary), on Zechariah 1:5

"Ministers are dying men, and live not for ever in this world. They are to look upon themselves as such, and to preach accordingly, as those that must be silenced shortly, and know not which sermon may be the last... Oh that this weighty consideration had its due weight given it, that we are dying ministers dealing with dying people about the concerns of immortal souls and an awful eternity, which both they and we are standing upon the brink of!"


And these words are not just for preachers. If the trivialities of life have dulled your mind and blinded your eyes, wake up and remember that one day you will die and stand before God. If Christ does not return first "at an hour when you do not expect him." "Therefore keep watch" (Mat 24:44, 42)

Brief reflections on blogging and reading

One of the things that I learnt from John Frame, in The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (DKG) (see post: some books) is that ontology precedes epistemology. That is, what we know precedes how we know. We know things - many things, before we get round to reflecting on our process of knowing. One might think, Frame argues, that we should be clear about the methods that we do use or should use in acquiring knowledge before we embark on knowing. After all, how can we be sure we're not using faulty methods if we don't set them out clearly beforehand? The knowledge we have may be seriously skewed since we may be using the wrong methods of getting it? So LET'S GET OUR METHODS STRAIGHT FIRST!!!!!!! (note the increasing fervour) Wrong - contends Frame - "Contrary to our intellectualist prejudices, the practice of something generally precedes its definition" We know many things before we rationalise about the process of knowing.

Well, the point of this post is not to indulge in lengthy philosophical reflections. I have appended a paragaph from DKG if you're interested. Rather, Frame's point was brought to mind as I reflected a little over this thing called blogging which I have recently embarked upon. But rather than reflect excessively at this stage over the nature and purpose of blogging, perhaps it is better to go straight into blogging, do some, and reflect as I go along.

Which leads me, rather haphazardly, to me saying that at this stage I have no great scheme, or plan of 18 themes that I wish to develop in this blog. I therefore at this stage throw out some random reflections, and see where they end up.


I hope at some stage to write some posts on the books which I have said have been influential to me at different times of my life, and some of the lessons I have learnt from them. Books are incredibly important, for many reasons, but two thoughts are brought to mind at this point:

1) John Piper has a chapter in Brothers, We Are not Professionals entitled "Brothers, Fight for Your Life" What is it about? Books. He begins:

"I agree with Martyn Lloyd-Jones that the fight to find time to read is a fight for one's life. 'Let your wife or anyone else take messages for you, and inform the people who are telephoning that you are not available. One literally has to fight for one's life in this sense.'"

Why so? Because of the sheer, desperate need to feed our own souls. Piper is writing particularly for pastors, who face the danger of being drained, becoming dry, as they prepare messages, give, serve, serve, serve:

"For your own soul and for the life of your church, fight for time to feed your soul with rich reading. Almost all the forces in our culture are trivializing. If you want to stay alive to what is great and glorious and beautiful and eternal, you will have to fight for time to look through the eyes of others who were in touch with God."

This is not just for pastors.

2) Secondly, I am reminded by some comments by Don Carson, in his brief reflection on 2 Timothy 3 (For the love of God volume 1) In the light of the sin and dangers of the last days (NB = which "range from Christ's ascension to his return) (vv.1-7), how should we live?

"First, we must resolve to follow the best mentors (3:10-11). These are the people whose lives reflect the Gospel, and who have been tested by hardship and protected by God. In a world of many pop idols, not least in the field of religion, we must become intentional about choosing the best mentors, or by default we shall probably choose poor ones."

Carson has more to say on this theme in Basics for Believers, chapter 4, "Emulate Worthy Christian Leaders".

It may not be easy to find mature Christians to act as examples and mentors to us. (cf. post by Dan Bowen and comments by Mark Heath here) And books are in many ways poor substitutes. But the books we read can have a profound influence on our thinking and our living. And so we must choose carefully who to read; to choose carefully which books and authors we should allow to mentor us.

It is good to read widely, to read a variety, even to read books that are profoundly unhelpful (with caveats - I hope to post some thoughts on this at a later date). But we must select carefully those books which will mentor us, which will quench our thirst when we are dry, which will refresh us when we are drained, which will challenge us when we are complacent. And of course, it is to God's Word we must turn to first and most frequently. But we must also select with wisdom those things we read that will expound and preach and apply and wield God's Word to us.

END OF POST

As promised, I append a longer quote from John Frame:

"One could argue that the doctrine of the knowledge of God ought to be a student's first introduction to systematic theology. After all, it seems that one must know what knowing is before one goes about the business of knowing specific things. One must know what theology is before one can do theology. Right? Well, yes and no. On the one hand, there is certainly much virtue in the idea of discussing epistemology toward the beginning of a student's theological course of study, since it does provide him with concepts and methods that will enrich the rest of his study. On the other hand, the lack of philosophical, linguistic, and catechetical background of many seminary students makes me wonder if first-year students are ready to tackle an area of study as difficult as this can be. And more seriously, there is a sense in which students are not ready to define "theology" until they have done it, just as they are not ready to define "knowledge" until they have done some knowing. Contrary to our intellectualist prejudices, the practice of something generally precedes its definition. (People were writing poetry and thinking logically long before Aristotle defined poetry and formulated a logic.) Can you do theology without knowing what theology is? Of course, just as you can tell time without having a definition of "time," just as you can walk or eat or breathe without being able to give precise definitions of those activities. And sometimes we must do something before we can define it. It is scarcely conceivable that anyone could define "seeing" without ever having seen anything. And if a blind man were able, through reading in braille dictionaries, to define sight, imagine how much deeper his understanding of it would be after his sight were restored. A student is not ready, in my view, to appreciate definitions of "theology" or of the "knowledge of God" unless he has already done some ` theology and unless he already knows God!"

Taking the plunge, but for what purpose?

I hardly know at this stage where this blog is going to go. I feel it must have some purpose, something to contribute, yet at this stage I am not clear what. I suspect that for a few months, it will consist of rather sporadic, somewhat random entries, until I find my feet and have a clearer sense of direction. In that respect it is not unlike beginning to submerge oneself in a new literature, dipping one's toe into a new realm of enquiry, not quite sure where one is going to be taken.

At this stage, my idea is to use this blog to comment on things I have read; readings that have stimulated my mind in all kinds of directions. I shall be attempting to think and write as a Christian, but not only on areas which would be called 'religious'. Better put, since all of life is religious, :) I will be seeking to bring a Christian mind to bear on everything I possibly can!!

My particular areas of interests lie in things like geography and history, in theology and Biblical interpretation, in birdwatching and sport, in Spain, and more besides.

It is a rather strange to think that these random thoughts will be posted on a blog that could be read by anyone, or, more likely, no-one! Doubtless they will be lost in the virtual ether! But I am (potentially) publishing my thoughts to the world! What a scary thought. And yet, my innermost thoughts and feelings are already known. "Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account." (Hebrews 4:13)