Coping in a Post-Jackson World

I didn't believe it until Twitter told me. There I was, chatting with my friends at a cookout when, upon receiving the Tweet heard 'round the world, my phone chirped. It was the BBC just letting me know that, "Oh, by the way, Michael Jackson has left the building."

More fascinating to me than the rise and fall of a musical genius, is the reaction of that fickle entity which openly confesses to being America. I'm not sure I understand the sentiment expressed in some i-reports which (and I don't remember for sure) went something like this, "AHHHHHH! MY LIFE IS OVER!!!! AHHHHH!!!" I also don't really understand the opposite (and very un-Christian) sentiment which basically says, "Burn in you-know-where, you stupid you-know-what."

I think my sentiment more parallels what one of my friends remarked via Twitter, I am "strangely saddened my Michael Jackson's death." I'm "strangely" saddened because I have no relationship with Jackson, and I'm not convinced he made the world a better place or that his lifestyle brought glory to God. I'm strangely "saddened" because I have no reason to believe that Jackson had placed his faith in Christ for his salvation. This saddens me.

It's a sober reminder that all the riches (and he was rich), all the fame (and he was famous), and all the talent (and he was talented) couldn't stop the ready-or-not-here-I-come appointment with your enemy and mine - death.

Don't Judge Me: Part 4 of 4

Continued from, Don’t Judge Me: Part 3 of 4

~~~

If we aren’t even allowed to interpret the law, how could we hold a conviction about anything? I wouldn't be able to write this post, because I'm "passing judgment" about what James/Matthew/Paul are teaching.

If we are supposed to be a doer of the law, this automatically involves a certain amount of interpretation and application. Thus, we can approach a brother with our interpretation of the law, and try to "restore" him/her. However, if the accused won't yield, all we can do is treat them as an unbeliever.

Even in doing so however, we must remember that we aren't the one who is the lawgiver and judge. We aren't the one who is able to save and destroy. We must always be open to the fact that perhaps, we are the ones who have been interpreting the law/scripture incorrectly.

It is a wise person indeed who has the diligence to interpret the law, the courage to obey it, and the honesty to admit that he isn't the final Judge.

Do we need a Savior?

I've heard Ravi Zacharias quote this song, but never actually heard it performed until now. Very thought provoking song, well worth the listen (if you can get past the odd performance style). My favorite line is in the chorus, "If the soul is darkened by a fear it cannot name..."

~~~



Hallelujah! Hallelujah!, Hallelujah!

From the canyons of the mind,
We wander on and stumble blindly
Through the often-tangled maze
Of starless nights and sunless days,
While asking for some kind of clue
Or road to lead us to the truth,
But who will answer?

Side by side two people stand,
Together vowing, hand-in-hand
That love's imbedded in their hearts,
But soon an empty feeling starts
To overwhelm their hollow lives,
And when they seek the hows and whys,
Who will answer?

On a strange and distant hill,
A young man's lying very still.
His arms will never hold his child,
Because a bullet running wild
Has struck him down. And now we cry,
"Dear God, Oh, why, oh, why?"
But who will answer?

High upon a lonely ledge,
a figure teeters near the edge,
And jeering crowds collect below
To egg him on with, "Go, man, go!"
But who will ask what led him
To his private day of doom,
And who will answer?

(Chorus)

If the soul is darkened
By a fear it cannot name,
If the mind is baffled
When the rules don't fit the game,
Who will answer? Who will answer? Who will answer?
Hallelujah! Hallelujah!, Hallelujah!

In the rooms of dark and shades,
The scent of sandalwood pervades.
The colored thoughts in muddled heads
Reclining in the rumpled beds
Of unmade dreams that can't come true,
And when we ask what we should do,
Who... Who will answer?

'Neath the spreading mushroom tree,
The world revolves in apathy
As overhead, a row of specks
Roars on, drowned out by discotheques,
And if a secret button's pressed
Because one man has been outguessed,
Who will answer?

Is our hope in walnut shells
Worn 'round the neck with temple bells,
Or deep within some cloistered walls
Where hooded figures pray in halls?
Or crumbled books on dusty shelves,
Or in our stars, or in ourselves,
Who will answer?

If the soul is darkened
By a fear it cannot name,
If the mind is baffled
When the rules don't fit the game,
Who will answer? Who will answer? Who will answer?
Hallelujah! Hallelujah!, Hallelujah!

~~~
Lyrics taken from lyricsmode.com

Don't Judge Me: Part 3 of 4

Continued from, Don’t Judge Me: Part Two

~~~

James’ main point? "Who are you to judge your neighbor?" A difficulty arises when we try to reconcile this passage of Scripture with those that outline how to confront a fellow believer about their sin (Matthew 18:15; Galatians 6:1).

In Matthew 18:15-17, the accuser first confronts the accused one-on-one with the hopes of "regaining the brother". If that doesn't work, the accuser brings with him two or three witnesses. If the issue still isn't resolved, the issue is brought before the church. It is a thoughtfully long, and painful process, which, if unsuccessful, ends with the accused being viewed as "a Gentile or a tax collector".

In Galatians 6:1, the spiritually mature are instructed to "restore" the one "discovered in some sin". But, even the "spiritual" person is warned to confront in a "spirit of gentleness" and to "pay attention to yourselves, so that you are not tempted too." Again, this process is a humble one, with the goal of restoring Christ-likeness.

Both of these passages have a sense of inherit humility in the confrontation process. The million dollar question is, are the views of James and Matthew(Jesus)/Paul exclusive of one another? Can you follow both, or are you going to have to pick sides? If you took a both/and approach to this dilemma, the principle that emerges seems to be,

"Though we often must interpret the law (and thus make decisions, and even confront based upon it), we are not, and should not function as/pretend to be, the final judge."

~~~

Part Four of this series will attempt to expand on the above principle.

Don't Judge Me: Part 2 of 4

Continued from, Don’t Judge Me: Part 1 of 4

~~~

According to James 4:11-12, we shouldn't pass judgment upon a fellow believer because....

...you are judging the law.
James makes the point that if you are judging your believer, you are really judging the law. Thus, you aren't really "doing" the law, you're "judging" it. According to BDAG, the Greek word used here for "judge" means, "pass an unfavorable judgment upon, criticize, find fault with, condemn". James goes on to explain a second reason that this placing of oneself above the law is a big deal.

...there is only One who is Lawgiver and Judge.
James never explicitly states who this "one" is that both gives the law, and is it's judge. Hint: It isn't Judge Judy. Obviously, God is in view here, particularly because this "one" is also able to "save and destroy". In other words, there is only one who can give and enforce laws.

...who are you to judge your neighbor?
In light of the above facts, (there is only one lawgiver and judge) - what's the point of trying to pass judgment? We didn't give the law, and we can't enforce it either - so why act like we can? James also seems to be implying that, since we are all sinners, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy that goes along with passing judgment on your neighbor.

All of this seems straightforward enough, but how can James' teaching be reconciled with other passages of Scripture that outline how to confront a fellow believer about their sin? (See: Matthew 18:15; Galatians 6:1)

~~~

Part three of this series will talk about the tension between this passage and others in scripture.