One Little Detail

One Little Detail

Sometimes it is the one little detail that changes things. One “tweak” in the regular ways of things can make a big difference.

Last week I was signed up for a photography class in the evening after work. I had to work in a different town, so I brought my laptop in my backpack to mess with the photos from last class.

When I pulled into the parking lot, I realized I was closer to the vehicle next to me than I liked. Trying to be considerate, I only opened my door halfway. I’d have to squeeze out, but no big deal.

Except for one little detail.

Hurts right THERE!
I threw my backpack on my left shoulder. The backpack loaded down with extra weight. I slipped it out first, and twisted and leaned to the left as I got out of the car.
Tweak

Yeah, that was the sound of my back going out. I started having pain before I got to the doors of the building. In two hours I couldn’t sit OR stand for long periods of time. Thankfully I work in a medical office so I was able to use an e-stim machine to zap my spasming muscles to buy a little relief.

There are actually several “little details” that contributed to my back going out. If I wasn’t taking the class. If I hadn’t brought my laptop. If I hadn’t parked too close to the other vehicle. If I loaded my right shoulder instead of the left.

It made me think of the spiritual life. Sometimes all it takes is that one little detail: a white lie, a tiny compromise, a small sin. It’s not a big deal, right? What is it going to hurt?

Sometimes it can hurt a lot. Trust me.

It took a few days of rest and a visit to my friendly neighborhood physical therapist to get put back together. All of the yard work I had planned for the weekend? Not happening. Still, the physical issues could be restored with a skilled therapist and rest.

The little sin, the small compromise, the white lie?

Not as easily.

Catch us the foxes,
The little foxes that spoil the vines,
For our vines have tender grapes. Song of Solomon 2:15

One Little Detail

One Little Detail

Sometimes it is the one little detail that changes things. One “tweak” in the regular ways of things can make a big difference.

Last week I was signed up for a photography class in the evening after work. I had to work in a different town, so I brought my laptop in my backpack to mess with the photos from last class.

When I pulled into the parking lot, I realized I was closer to the vehicle next to me than I liked. Trying to be considerate, I only opened my door halfway. I’d have to squeeze out, but no big deal.

Except for one little detail.

Hurts right THERE!
I threw my backpack on my left shoulder. The backpack loaded down with extra weight. I slipped it out first, and twisted and leaned to the left as I got out of the car.
Tweak

Yeah, that was the sound of my back going out. I started having pain before I got to the doors of the building. In two hours I couldn’t sit OR stand for long periods of time. Thankfully I work in a medical office so I was able to use an e-stim machine to zap my spasming muscles to buy a little relief.

There are actually several “little details” that contributed to my back going out. If I wasn’t taking the class. If I hadn’t brought my laptop. If I hadn’t parked too close to the other vehicle. If I loaded my right shoulder instead of the left.

It made me think of the spiritual life. Sometimes all it takes is that one little detail: a white lie, a tiny compromise, a small sin. It’s not a big deal, right? What is it going to hurt?

Sometimes it can hurt a lot. Trust me.

It took a few days of rest and a visit to my friendly neighborhood physical therapist to get put back together. All of the yard work I had planned for the weekend? Not happening. Still, the physical issues could be restored with a skilled therapist and rest.

The little sin, the small compromise, the white lie?

Not as easily.

Catch us the foxes,
The little foxes that spoil the vines,
For our vines have tender grapes. Song of Solomon 2:15

Doctrine and Discussion, Part 2

Doctrine and Discussion, Part 2

Ready for round 2?

Yesterday I posted about the discussion surrounding Rob Bell and his latest book Love Wins. (Not about the book itself, if that’s what you’re looking for – but stick around anyway!) In watching the discussion online, I noticed an accusation that was disconcerting. Many people questioned whether there was heresy or an admission of universalism in the book. That wasn’t my issue. My concern came when some commenters started hitting back accusing critics of placing more importance on doctrine over love and relationship.

My previous point was the repetitive admonishment in the books of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus over teaching sound doctrine. Paul stressed that over and over again in those books, so I don’t think it is out of line for people to actually question whether there are doctrinal problems in any author’s work.

I had another point though, the subject of today’s post. Again, I go to the pastoral letters for support.



“Did not!” “Did so!”

 Paul repeats another theme for Timothy and Titus: avoid quarrelsome speech (Titus 3:2, 1 Tim 3:3, 2 Tim 2:14, 24). This idea is suggested several times, also in the form of controversies, dissensions, or myths.

I’ve seen this in many arenas, from Christians fighting amongst themselves to politicians tearing each other down. This has frustrated me for a long time. A person can spout fully orthodox positions, be clearly speaking God’s word, but they do it in such an ugly manner that it totally demeans the very point they’re trying to make.

People on both sides of the Rob Bell debate have been guilty of this. Whether they’re angry, smug, sarcastic, condemning, or just plain nasty or rude, they are violating another key point of the pastoral letters. “And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to everyone, an apt teacher, patient, correcting opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth.” (2 Tim 2:24-25).

How we react in such things is just as important as the what and why! We may be speaking the truth, but if we do it in the wrong spirit, then we are also disobeying the Lord and walking in sin. I’ve been very disturbed to see televangelists or a conservative Christian politician tear down opponents of their positions. That, to me, is not the Spirit of Christ.

Don’t get me wrong. Titus 1:9 tells us that an overseer must “be able both to preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it.” Mature believers have a responsibility to examine an idea from a book, a teacher, a church, and to see if it matches up with sound doctrine. But the heart of the matter can be lost if it is done in anger or putting someone down.

Romans 12:20-21 says: “’If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” OK, so I don’t think this passage should be considered to be calling Rob Bell or his detractors “enemies” or “evil.” The principle is moving in the opposite spirit. Shouldn’t Christians be able to speak with grace and gentleness, especially with issues involving other Christians?

I’ve really enjoyed studying the letters of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus lately. I’ve had to step up into a new leadership position at my church, so I figured Paul’s advice here would be valuable. The dual emphasis on teaching sound doctrine but doing so without quarreling/with gentleness in these letters has been a poignant reminder in what I’ve been reading online lately. My hope for anyone reading these two posts is that they continue to seek the truth, but speak it in love.

Doctrine and Discussion, Part 2

Doctrine and Discussion, Part 2

Ready for round 2?

Yesterday I posted about the discussion surrounding Rob Bell and his latest book Love Wins. (Not about the book itself, if that’s what you’re looking for – but stick around anyway!) In watching the discussion online, I noticed an accusation that was disconcerting. Many people questioned whether there was heresy or an admission of universalism in the book. That wasn’t my issue. My concern came when some commenters started hitting back accusing critics of placing more importance on doctrine over love and relationship.

My previous point was the repetitive admonishment in the books of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus over teaching sound doctrine. Paul stressed that over and over again in those books, so I don’t think it is out of line for people to actually question whether there are doctrinal problems in any author’s work.

I had another point though, the subject of today’s post. Again, I go to the pastoral letters for support.



“Did not!” “Did so!”

 Paul repeats another theme for Timothy and Titus: avoid quarrelsome speech (Titus 3:2, 1 Tim 3:3, 2 Tim 2:14, 24). This idea is suggested several times, also in the form of controversies, dissensions, or myths.

I’ve seen this in many arenas, from Christians fighting amongst themselves to politicians tearing each other down. This has frustrated me for a long time. A person can spout fully orthodox positions, be clearly speaking God’s word, but they do it in such an ugly manner that it totally demeans the very point they’re trying to make.

People on both sides of the Rob Bell debate have been guilty of this. Whether they’re angry, smug, sarcastic, condemning, or just plain nasty or rude, they are violating another key point of the pastoral letters. “And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to everyone, an apt teacher, patient, correcting opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth.” (2 Tim 2:24-25).

How we react in such things is just as important as the what and why! We may be speaking the truth, but if we do it in the wrong spirit, then we are also disobeying the Lord and walking in sin. I’ve been very disturbed to see televangelists or a conservative Christian politician tear down opponents of their positions. That, to me, is not the Spirit of Christ.

Don’t get me wrong. Titus 1:9 tells us that an overseer must “be able both to preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it.” Mature believers have a responsibility to examine an idea from a book, a teacher, a church, and to see if it matches up with sound doctrine. But the heart of the matter can be lost if it is done in anger or putting someone down.

Romans 12:20-21 says: “’If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” OK, so I don’t think this passage should be considered to be calling Rob Bell or his detractors “enemies” or “evil.” The principle is moving in the opposite spirit. Shouldn’t Christians be able to speak with grace and gentleness, especially with issues involving other Christians?

I’ve really enjoyed studying the letters of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus lately. I’ve had to step up into a new leadership position at my church, so I figured Paul’s advice here would be valuable. The dual emphasis on teaching sound doctrine but doing so without quarreling/with gentleness in these letters has been a poignant reminder in what I’ve been reading online lately. My hope for anyone reading these two posts is that they continue to seek the truth, but speak it in love.

Doctrine and Discussion

Doctrine and Discussion



I <3 questions!



Rob Bell. Universalism. Heresy. Love Wins.
There’s a few words that should hit the search engines! There’s been a lot of discussion in the Christian blogosphere over the last month, and much of it was related to those points above. The discussion has ranged from rancorous to gentle, and has often generated more heat than light.

I’ve been an interested observer during this. I haven’t read the book, I’m not afraid to read it, but I don’t know if I’ll get around to it (as a friend has said before, my “to be read” pile threatens low-flying aircraft). What I have been reading compels me to share a few thoughts.

There’s been a lot of critique over Love Wins, and there’s been backlash over this. People have been critical of those raising objections to some of the theology in the book. At times, it has seemed to be a push-back against the questions. I’ve seen posts on Facebook and Twitter talking about legalism vs. love, as if we are only dealing with a dualism in this. Those who ask questions whether Rob Bell is theologically correct are being likened to the Pharisees. Can’t we reason together without it denigrating one side or the other?

Paul, when writing the pastoral letters to Timothy and Titus, keeps hammering a theme home: the need to teach sound doctrine. When a book of the Bible repeats a subject, it is a clue to us that it is important. When three books do that, even more so. I was amazed reading through these books how often he stresses this to Timothy and Titus. Didn’t these guys spend a lot of time with Paul? Wouldn’t they see how important it was by then?

Obviously it is important to Paul, because there are several mentions of the idea of “sound doctrine/instruction/teaching.” The qualifications of an elder including holding on to the trustworthy message (Titus 1:9). They are to pass the teaching on to reliable people (2 Tim 2:2). If he mentions it this much to two men who stood with Paul to the end, then the idea of sound doctrine is an important idea, even if our post-modern age likes to ask questions without many answers.

I don’t pretend that the Church has God totally figured out. He is so grand and majestic that there is a mystery to Him. As John said, books on end could be written about Jesus and they wouldn’t cover enough about him. (I’m also reminded of the Teacher who says “Of making many books there is no end.”)

Still, we have the Word of God that is reliable and God-breathed. We can know Him, and we can understand principles of right doctrine. Paul admonishes us repeatedly to hold to sound doctrine. It may not be in favor, but I’ll stand there instead of quelling any criticism. We should be able to discuss issues like Love Wins in a way that honors Paul’s teaching fully…

Which is why I’ve got a follow up post tomorrow with more on this point! See you then 😉

Doctrine and Discussion

Doctrine and Discussion



I <3 questions!



Rob Bell. Universalism. Heresy. Love Wins.
There’s a few words that should hit the search engines! There’s been a lot of discussion in the Christian blogosphere over the last month, and much of it was related to those points above. The discussion has ranged from rancorous to gentle, and has often generated more heat than light.

I’ve been an interested observer during this. I haven’t read the book, I’m not afraid to read it, but I don’t know if I’ll get around to it (as a friend has said before, my “to be read” pile threatens low-flying aircraft). What I have been reading compels me to share a few thoughts.

There’s been a lot of critique over Love Wins, and there’s been backlash over this. People have been critical of those raising objections to some of the theology in the book. At times, it has seemed to be a push-back against the questions. I’ve seen posts on Facebook and Twitter talking about legalism vs. love, as if we are only dealing with a dualism in this. Those who ask questions whether Rob Bell is theologically correct are being likened to the Pharisees. Can’t we reason together without it denigrating one side or the other?

Paul, when writing the pastoral letters to Timothy and Titus, keeps hammering a theme home: the need to teach sound doctrine. When a book of the Bible repeats a subject, it is a clue to us that it is important. When three books do that, even more so. I was amazed reading through these books how often he stresses this to Timothy and Titus. Didn’t these guys spend a lot of time with Paul? Wouldn’t they see how important it was by then?

Obviously it is important to Paul, because there are several mentions of the idea of “sound doctrine/instruction/teaching.” The qualifications of an elder including holding on to the trustworthy message (Titus 1:9). They are to pass the teaching on to reliable people (2 Tim 2:2). If he mentions it this much to two men who stood with Paul to the end, then the idea of sound doctrine is an important idea, even if our post-modern age likes to ask questions without many answers.

I don’t pretend that the Church has God totally figured out. He is so grand and majestic that there is a mystery to Him. As John said, books on end could be written about Jesus and they wouldn’t cover enough about him. (I’m also reminded of the Teacher who says “Of making many books there is no end.”)

Still, we have the Word of God that is reliable and God-breathed. We can know Him, and we can understand principles of right doctrine. Paul admonishes us repeatedly to hold to sound doctrine. It may not be in favor, but I’ll stand there instead of quelling any criticism. We should be able to discuss issues like Love Wins in a way that honors Paul’s teaching fully…

Which is why I’ve got a follow up post tomorrow with more on this point! See you then 😉