Sunday, April 08, 2007

The Cross is not Full

0 comments

I remember as a child wondering at the presence of Christ on the cross of the Romanists. The cross in my church didn't have Jesus on it. Was my cross deficient? In response, and I still don't remember who told me, I remember being told: the Roman cross had Christ upon it because the Catholics believe "Christ is still on the Cross." The answer may seem a little insufficient, for a child, yet today as an adult I can think of no better way to say it, even to those who are not Catholic.


I understand this in a very simple childish way but, that is exactly what it means. And it means it for any that believe his work was not enough, labeled with Catholic, Baptist, Charismatic, or "purple-with-pink-polka-dots," it doesn't matter. The effectual worth of Christ's death on the cross was complete and was vindicated by our Savior's resurrection. When Christ "gave up the ghost" he relinquished the last passage of obedience that God the Father required of him and died, the perfect sacrifice, full and complete (eternal in measurement really) in order to satisfy the just requirements of a Righteous God. His work was complete. "It is finished," he cried, and that's exactly what it means. It means that when he was carried from that cross and buried in the tomb of a rich man that the work was completed. His body as a result was not to be "abandoned to Sheol" (to death, the grave) and would not see "corruption." The body of Christ was sacrificed, once for all, and it need hang no more on a tree cursed. The Testament that required sufficiency was fulfilled, as Christ said, "I have come to fulfill the Law," and so he did.
On the day in the year that those with the label of Christ (some indelibly) celebrate the risen Lord we can easily forget that leaves the cross empty, not only the tomb. If the Tomb be empty, so the Cross! Any temptation of ours to glory in our own salvation, in our own works, is tantamount to the visage of a Christ still on the cross, insufficient and no savior at all! Such legalisms and proud efforts at attempting to gain the pleasure of the Lord with our efforts is not acceptable with an empty tomb, nor an empty cross. It leaves the obedience of Christ as an ineffectual tender in satisfying the Judge of the Universe. I cannot claim penance, the Rosary, morning devotions, church attendance, American citizenship, Awana buttons and beads, or bigger bible as aid. This is no salvation! Scripture says this is faulty and there is no room for such paltry doctrines of Christ and the Cross. If He be Christ at all, his death must have been effectual, anything less is to make him a salvation "tease." It leaves Christ's offering to us as a bait, something calling us but, in the end, unsatisfactory to the Righteousness of God! Especially if it needs Awana buttons. A Divine Comedy, indeed. Yet, Scripture is so full in its explanation of Christ's effect it comprises even our own faith. Christ sacrifice was so great that it was sufficient to provide above and beyond our need in the satisfaction of God, so much that it not only supplied the satisfaction of the Father in Christ the Son, it gave impetus to the work of the Spirit in those who would come to faith even unto sanctification--and even Awana stickers. Thus, we cannot add to the satisfaction of the Father, even in credit for our faith in it! If even this lowest response, this primary response of faith is God's work, his gift, what else do we have? (Ephesians 2:8-9) His work must have been complete enough to supply even this.
Further, any attempts to excuse wanton sinfulness while clinging to the name of the Risen Lord also places him back upon that tree of punishment! It is to render the work of the Lord, not ineffective towards the Lord, as those of legalism and pride would do; no, it renders his sacrifice ineffectual in the life of the believer. I cannot even begin to explain how silly this is-- if you accept his death was great enough to satisfy the Almighty, its power great enough to cover the sin of all saved, blotted from before the eyes of God but, you claim it is too weak to afford the sanctification of His Body, that it needs assistance or further effort on our part is mentally unattainable. Christ's work must be enough to save even the most sinful and sanctify them without repair! Hence, Scripture's warning to those with such excuse. It is more likely that those who continue in their sin, rampant and without regard, yet claim Christ's name, do not have Christ's work and be no Christians at all. Such an ineffectual salvation is not found in Scripture! (Hebrews 6:1-12) Such people join in Pilate's promenade, "And they cried out again, 'Crucify him.'” Consider the Cross and the Tomb in Romans 6:
1What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 We know that our old self [1] was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. 7 For one who has died has been set free [2] from sin. 8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. 10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. 11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.

12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. 13 Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. 14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

There is no dominion of sin in the believer after the empty cross. Truly, with sin we will wrestle, yet, no longer as a subject or lover of this cadaver--now as freemen and newmen casting aside the flesh that clings as a the dead skin yet to fall to live in him. This sanctification too is by Christ's power, and it is effectual even to the day of glorification. For this I cannot begin to express my thanks! Even this work would be too much for me. The empty cross is mine just as the full cross should have been, and the empty tomb as well.
Christ's resurrection was a seal of God the Father's pleasure and first-proof of Christ's power as Savior! Praise the Lord on this day, Christ, our Savior died in perfect effect towards the Lord and towards His Church, in full effect to His Father and to we his beneficiaries! May his glory ring forever. He is risen indeed and the cross is as empty as the tomb. Happy Easter.

post signature




AddThis Social Bookmark Button


Friday, April 06, 2007

Good Friday Post

0 comments
I really don't think I could post anything better today...so I will link to the ESV Blog on Good Friday-2007. But...

Let me encourage all, before listening to the post content, to consider the nature of the record read. It is not some unattached account of a really nice story in which we all hope in. No, the record only has impact because it really happened. I am really amazed at how quickly the terrible nature of Christ's death is lost, yes, even in the visualization of the several good Passion Week dramas. How quickly this time of the year, in fact, much of our Christian lives can be based totally on principles we gather from Scripture (not that I do not think principles are not there for such reasons) yet, how many people, those named "believers" forget it was a real, historical, event? This is what we are to believe in, not some concept, naked and standing in the cold of nominalism, alone. Not a principle "greater than ourselves," yet dimmer than anything of substance. Disney did not write the script for this story, it really did happened and that is the only reason it matters. Yes, I said, only. This is the very argument Paul makes (dare I point out-under the direction of the Holy Spirit?) in 1 Corinthians 15?
"And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain... If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied."
Scripture leaves no room for anything less than a full and true dependence of all Christians on the true life, death and resurrection of Christ...or, we are of all people most to be pitied. Our faith is an historical faith, not an "emerging" one, a submerging one, or a flighty flirty one. It is based in the single and powerful work of a real man, the Real God, extended and revealed in history, sovereign over all things before there was time, in all of time, now and forever; this is our great hope! Our hope is in historical truths like: the cross had splinters (hat tip: F. Schaeffer, link: L'Abri) Christ's blood was slick and sticky as it clung to the grooves of that wooden curse, Romans cackled and joked at his feet, Mary cried, and disciples fled. The sky turned black, fear overwhelmed criminals nearby, saving one and a Roman who felt the earth shake and saw little pebbles tremble like his heart on the pounded dirt at his feet...and he knew this was the Christ. Had we lived more than 2000 years ago, a short span from now, we would have been able to see the same events not hope for them to happen.
If Christ had died today, it would have been the most horrific death one could conceive of in our justice system, it would have been unfair and brutal, perhaps even outside our justice system. He would have been pronounced dead and accompanied with many signs, excluding the silly debates over his power, and terror would have fallen on those who the Lord had chosen, fear on those who had hoped and a few days later would be reminded of it's promise. And without any doubt, if it be any comparison a real room with the body of Christ, perhaps a morgue, a shiny table sliding out from a wall would have been empty three days later, with angles standing at it's handle telling of the absence of the risen Lord. No, this wouldn't be some fake CSI stunt, it would be real. Definitely as real as you can consider of a death of your own loved one, perhaps of those you have seen lying in a coffin at a funeral. Not like those Hollywood manufactured deaths- rather real, real enough to make you sick, your stomach churn and your knees weeken. My analogy has holes, to be sure! But, that is because it is only an analogy--yet, my point should be clear...it was all real, just like today, yesterday or tomorrow As real as we know these to be and expect, history did happen and Christ was at its center and he did bear a thorny crown, fall under the weight of the cross, and not just for us to be able to read a good story that should "impact our lives." Christ died to obey God the Father, Creator of Heaven and Earth. He died that all we, whom he loves, would not have to face the consequences of offending God's right and good justice and he really did die.

Hear the audio of John's account of this dark day, yet great day, here:

http://www.esvmedia.org/podcasts/good.friday.mp3

post signature




AddThis Social Bookmark Button


Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Teenagers

0 comments

Over at Pulpit Magazine, Eric Bankcroft, who I have had the privilege to hear on a few occasions, including a funny opportunity I didn't plan at The Egg Plantation (read: overhear, and we both noticed it and chatted about the irony after) nails a good subject concerning youth and the growing trend in churches in entertaining teens in an article: Teenagers: Distract or Develop?


For many churches the issue of youth group and the perspectives concerning it are molded around viewing the large group of youth as consumers and church a product. This should be no surprise as many adults view themselves as consumers and church as a market. (Come to our Easter service--it will be proceeded by a coffee bar from Starbucks! Mmm, I love Starbucks.) It is logical then that marketing strategies towards gaining the attention and "allegiance" of teens "in church" has turned too often towards entertainment and distraction; just another option in the dizzying marketplace of vanity, places for Pinocchio. Young adults then "do" church. Often this can turn into perspectives for families and teens themselves that picking a church ought to be done on the attention-getting nature of these programs alone and the tail wags the dog...of course this raises another whole generation that believes this is the "point of church." On the other end of the spectrum is the "just get them out of the pews" and into a place where they can be picked up from after (sound like Sunday School Day Care) where the young people are viewed more as the distraction themselves. Teens introduced to either of these church perspectives whether in the entertainment-driven distraction or the "youth are a distraction" does a poor job of recognizing "youth are our future." Bancroft points out:
"As pastors, we must put away the silliness and bring the seriousness of the Scriptures to bear on their lives with all that God expects from them . . . now. As churchmen, we must be careful not to adapt the culture’s mindset of dismissing or disrespecting them but instead invest into their lives with the intention of developing godliness."
Of course, one could replace "as pastors," with "as parents," or, "as teachers" or even just "as adults." I think he makes that case too. And, he's not in bad company, because the Bible happens to say so as well. Aside from the parenting passages in Scripture (read also many good posts at Pulpit on parenting-following the several strings on parenting is good!) consider all those appealing to the older in the church and what they ought to be in relation to the younger, Titus 2:1-7, and expectations of both young and old in the church, 1 John 2:12-14, to name a few. I cannot find a place where expectations of sanctification are paused for youth. The consistent expectation of all in the body of Christ is service--even the youth.
None of this even addresses the great disservice that entertaining them alone excludes them from the benefits of body life! For all who dwell in the body of Christ are given gifts for the "edification of the body" and building one-another up. As parts of the same body the edification is vital and by definition reciprocal. Teaching a youth to avoid this robs them of the joys of finding their place in the body and the nourishment that comes from participating in the life of the church. Such is why we are told not to forsake the gathering together of the body. Is it possible that just such a thing could be happening in the church gym, right on campus when youth men and women are taught by expectation and experience that they are to be apart from service and serving? From developing and enjoying the profits of sanctification? Or, should it all be about comedian-style preaching and lifesaver/toothpick games until mommy and daddy come to them up? Would we offer this instead of the riches of Christ's body? What does it say of us if we deny the very thing that would satisfy our beloved young ones? Isn't it ironic that dismissing such an important effort as the next generation will not only doom them now, but those who will take our place tomorrow?

post signature




AddThis Social Bookmark Button


Saturday, March 31, 2007

Duct Tape and, Evolution is Politics

0 comments



I know, like every good, red-blooded, American male that you need two things to make really tough things stick together in the face of impossible circumstances: Duct-tape, preferably lots of it, and MacGuyver on hand in case you don't remember how to do it without a ball-point pen and paper-clip. Newsweek seems, unfortunately, to have neither. And unfortunately neither do many Christians. In this absence, those writing the article and some it is writing of only demonstrate exactly what evolution truly is: A "political" decision in beliefs, one that retains its commitment not to science or even reasonable thought but one that will vote for anything (or against anything) as long as it isn't for a Creator God that could hold us all responsible! Upon reading a recent article over at Newsweek entitled: God's Numbers I was struck by two things. First, the subline has an odd "also." Second, the conclusion other stats in the article seem to make of Christians is also "odd."

"The latest NEWSWEEK poll shows that 91 percent of American adults surveyed believe in God—and nearly half reject the theory of evolution. Also, Americans on John Edwards and the Senate's goal for troop withdrawal."
I must admit I am struck by the staggering numbers that are listed there but struck even more by the absence of any discussion concerning the facts that seem to support such large numbers. How could anyone record,

"Nearly half (48 percent) of the public rejects the scientific theory of evolution; one-third (34 percent) of college graduates say they accept the Biblical account of creation as fact. Seventy-three percent of Evangelical Protestants say they believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years; 39 percent of non-Evangelical Protestants and 41 percent of Catholics agree with that view."


and not do a little digging on why so many are convinced of the faults in the theory of macro-Evolution? Where is the discussion about the giant of Evolution teetering at the top of an ill-defensible beanstalk? Where is the investigation of the many scientists, philosophers and theologians all standing at the bottom of the stalk pointing at its shallow roots speaking of its impending fall? That is regardless of the fact that, any little boy (or girl) armed with the axe of
thermodynamics could chop it down with one swing. Can you see anyone trying to quickly unfurl as much Duct tape around the falling base of that vine? Is MacGuyver there? No, he is too smart for that. What is it that almost fifty-percent of the public sees that Newsweek won't investigate? Give me a break. Is there nothing more interesting about the decay of evolutionary explanations in every realm of science and the consistent juggernaut of Scriptural testament marching over it with the combined and the consistent models for a lawgiver in the realm of natural laws and the mass of people who believe so in one fashion or another? Should it be quickly left with an "also?" Where's the integrity? But of course, that is the issue. This isn't an issue of integrity, evolutionary debate hasn't been for a long time. Perhaps it was early on--Darwin sure said so enough times. His consistent expectations that he could be disproved over the thinnest of arguments is well known. He knew the beanstalk was thin! Yet, the allegiance of the world is not to evolution, it is a political decision to be loyal to anything but God. Romans 1:18 and following makes that clear if one would read it... (Romans 1) Evolution really isn't about science, it is about politics and voting for any idea that would proffer even the thinnest excuse for a life without a responsibility to a Creator God.

(See an interesting article by Edward Humes, writing for the LA Times, as he tries to brush off evolutionary challenges with a re-invention of its definition-something
he accuses those proposing intelligent design of doing. Note his "absense" of presuppositional bias in the title of his book the article refers to in header. His effort at justifying macro-evolution by referring to micro-evolutionary proofs is like trying to explain the speed and nature of stellar light by watching the lights on a Christmas tree flicker in a dim living room. Insufficient, even if they seem to relate doesn't begin to describe it. The truth is he himself is joining in the "dumbing down of evolution..to kill it." Look for the line where he says: the "real" evolution, "does not try
to explain how life originated — that remains a mystery. The truth is that many scientists accept evolution and believe in God.")

Why? why, why, why? This tragic irony in both articles mentioned impresses me with a second, even stranger thing. Strange, not because it was unexpected but because it should appear so to anyone reading. The Newsweek article says:

"A belief in God and an identification with an organized religion are widespread throughout the country, according to the latest NEWSWEEK poll. Nine in 10 (91 percent) of American adults say they believe in God and almost as many (87 percent) say they identify with a specific religion. Christians far outnumber members of any other faith in the country, with 82 percent of the poll’s respondents identifying themselves as such."
I like to tease math teachers about "when are we ever going to use the stuff?" but I would like to demonstrate it now for those watching as I actually just like the teasing and use it all the time, of course. Her we go: 90 percent of Americans believe in God with 82 percent claiming to be Christian. (I am not going to debate labels versus actual citizenship in the universal invisible body of Christ--just go with the numbers for now, its math!) And, 48 percent of the total disbelieve in evolution. That means, discluding the overlap of those from the ten-twenty percent that aren't Christian, there are a lot of Christians that remain in their insecurity concerning Genesis and actually believe in an evolutionary model of Creation despite the current teetering of the theory in general! The only question is why? There are now Christians holding onto something that a large percentage of top-of-their-field scientists question, and some aren't ev
en Christian! I find it incredibly strange that such a large percentage of Christians, even those labeled "Evangelical Protestants" (about thirty percent,) don't feel more comfortable sticking with the revelation of God starting with the first book of the Bible and the first line, "In the Beginning God created the Heavens and Earth." What is it that almost fifty percent of the public (including some "Christians") do not see? Why wouldn't they do the same digging that the Newsweek writers wouldn't? Could this be politics as well? It ought not to be.

Consider the words of Romans 1 again, yet only a few verses prior to the verse I pointed to prior, verses 16-17: "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith,as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.” It is the power of God! I am missing the politics there. Keep in mind the context then of the very next verse and its contrast! It is the wrath of God revealed from heaven against those who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. Would any believer want to put that "old man" from which he was saved, back on? Yeah, I will stir the pot and say it- Christ died for such unrighteousness!
The response of the believer is to be the opposite. In fact, 2 Corinthians 10:5 says, "We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." As Romans 1:16-17 points out, our God is not only a Creator-God, he is a Redeemer as well. The non-debate over macro-Evolution and Creationism is one in which no believer should question their position or belief. The text of Scripture is clear (despite the attempts of textual critics) as is the evidence found in Creation. Even if a believer doesn't understand the intricate debates in science over information origins, semiotics, or irreducible complexity (for a good start though, you can head over to AIG) every believer can be sure of the steadfast Word of the Lord and we have the answers therein that will destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God. Not relying on Scripture is like taking that Duct-Tape and placing it over our eyes, and certainly over our mouths. We should not be counted in the camp of evolution-politicians, and certainly not forget the incredible weight of a text that has stood longer than any other known to man. It is not an issue of pride, that we ourselves have the knowledge or, that we could have come to it without God's grace but, that it is secure for use. Delving first in Scripture and the delving of God's Creation as natural revelation, not the voting of politically motivated "science," should be our effort and argument. No believer should ever be sorry to be little Jack chopping at the thin and shallow root that holds Evolution in the clouds. That giant will fall even if Newsweek doesn't think so, or John Edwards, myself, you or, anyone silly enough to try and stand on the thing stalk of political science. Duct-tape in hand is nice but not helpful in this case.


PS: This article in no way disparages the use of Duct-tape. You should keep your Duct-Tape but for other things like, fixing car engines or, locking your bedroom door or, carefully preserving the bind on silly Newsweek magazines.


post signature




AddThis Social Bookmark Button


Friday, March 30, 2007

Why Pray, indeed?

0 comments
I was recently speaking with another Christian (yes, Christian--for those that will gasp when I finish this sentence)that happens to be an "Arminian." It is not that I think necessarily that he would even qualify himself this way but the term sums up what he said by the end of our conversation. "I just don't understand why anyone could believe in this predestination stuff," he said in mixed company. I say mixed because I realized shortly that he was actually speaking with a group of people comprised of those with similar understanding as he...that is all but me, a pretty avowed biblical Calvinist.


(Insert sound of oxygen leaving the room as those reading this debate whether I am a good Christian for being in the same room as an Arminian or others fill their lungs with horror because I just associated Christian and Calvinist.) I am pretty sure he didn't know my own understanding of Scripture as he continued to disparage the doctrines of what has been labeled "Calvinism" with a good amount of fervor, even suggesting that it may have something to do with people's understanding of Scripture as to why they maintained such error. I politely listened, I love the man, and decided to just consider his argument. Anyone that knows me will tell you that I am not afraid to jump into such debate with perhaps more than the necessary counter-fervor but I do believe it is important to do something strange every once in a while and, yup, listen. I am glad I did. The more he spoke the more his very set beliefs seemed to move further than Scripture itself and this was more than unfortunate. It slipped largely into an argument based upon love and God's and "logic" concerning man's decision-making abilities with little reference to Scripture at all. (By the way, you can check my Shelfari in the left column for a book that addresses God's Love and issues of "logic"and others with real excellence by, John MacArthur, Jr.)
I decided to ponder on his considerations as a matter of preparing a better response to such debate in the future. As I was pondering it throughout the week the Lord brought many passages to mind that I could list out here in machine-gun-style but many would be known by both sides of the argument with presuppositions already formed. Then, last night my wife told me something of a discussion she had at Bible study. In the course of her conversation with the other ladies they were considering Lydia and the special grace God showed in calling her to himself. Then, repeating the conclusions of another author they were considering my wife repeated something very profound--"Why Pray?" She wasn't' asking, she was telling. I had a real moment of clarity-that which is so clarion it can only be the Holy Spirit's breath over the repeated discussion of the Word. (I love it when that happens.)
I have often studied passages in the Psalms,commands in the New Testament to pray "without ceasing" and Christ's examples and parables in response to the disciples' question, "teach us to pray" and never had the practical conclusion her simple words impressed. I have even taught others on prayer, stressing its positioning of the believer correctly before God, in obedience and glorification with a healthy dose of total reliance. I have encouraged others to pray for others and their salvation as the right pleading of a believer for the lost, just as much, as a participation not only in the ordained ends of God but his means as well. Yet, I had never just considered the simple question: If God is not the total agent of salvation, then why pray to him as agent in the salvation of others? In fact, why pray to God to accomplish anything if he cannot accomplish this great and necessary task in the heart of the believer. Why would one be satisfied requesting self-provisions, bread, food, water, home, if these alone God supplies? Would God supply these alone to those he loves? Would he answer the believers as a hateful father giving only these lesser things but not that which we desperately need? And would he prescribe prayer not only by command but example in Christ himself? It is almost as "illogical" to assume such as a father giving his son a snake when he asks for fish! Is any believer willing to stand up and say, "Yeah, you know, I only pray because I love my friend and want him to come to Christ, but I know God can only wait for him?" Wouldn't it make more sense to pray to the individual you want to be "saved" by this impotent God than to pray to that God which cannot effect the salvation of he for whom you pray?
The Arminian (including that dear man I listened to in"discussion") must first assume a God able to move with Sovereign impunity to accomplish the salvation of those loved ones, or enemies, for whom they pray. Of course, so do I, and that isn't Arminian, that is decidedly Calvinist--it smacks of predestination and God's total sovereignty. Such a conception is a prerequisite for all prayer--including even Christ's prayer in Luke 11. To the non-Calvinist (specifically, those that deny God's predestination) the main issue is that of God's designation of those whom he will save and those he will not. The bur is the passages that seem to suggest that man is responsible for "choosing" God. This logical dilemma has answers and I would suggest that it is first solved by a reference to Scripture and then if the dilemma continues perhaps praying to the God who loves to reveal himself, sovereignly, transcendent and intimate and hears every word we utter--and can do something about it. Boy, I am glad he not only hears my words in prayer and responds: "My dear son, I wish that person wanted to be saved too...but there is nothing I can do about it. I guess we will have to wait and see what they do..."

For more on this subject from those who are more knowledgeable than I, see: Why I Am a Calvinist (Summary & Conclusion) over at Pulpit Magazine.

post signature





AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

The Pathway to Pro-Voucher (or Pro-Private School)


I was planning to continue my blog "welcome to Meph's Table" but I must admit the entry at WorldViews today: No child left ahead, caught my attention a little. It should be (and certainly I make no bones about it) no surprise that I teach at a private school--a very good one in my opinion. Find here if interested: Briarwood. With that admission to "bias" I would love to direct eyes to the article over at WorldViews. Can any one begin to wonder at why the scores that continue to come out about school performance continue to "surprise?" Come on.


-MC


Powered by ScribeFire.

Monday, March 26, 2007

Welcome to Meph's (1): The Cripple Usurper


For those of you that may be wondering about what this web site is all about perhaps it would be best to start with the meaning of its name:
Meph’s Table is short for: “Mephibosheth’s Table.” Mephibosheth is a real person born a few thousand years ago to a lineage well documented in history. No serious historian denies his existence. His breath and form are verified both by the largest body of known historical records and archaeological evidences. In some senses there is greater proof he existed than the great Caesar! There is no question he lived. The story isn't that he lived, rather it is how he ever did.

M
ephibosheth had the “misfortune” to be born the son of the King’s only heir, Jonathon. Misfortune because, when the King, Saul, had died Jonathon would have been made king but he too had perished in battle. The death of Mephibosheth's grandfather wasn't just a token to mourn it was a point of intense fear. A rival warlord had claimed the throne and Mephibosheth, through virtue of his lineage, became the only remaing claimant to the throne. At the news
of the King’s death Mephibosheth was only an infant and incredibly vulnerable. His very life was sure to welcome the transported vengeance of the new king and the lord's need to eliminate any potential challenge to the throne.
T
hus, Mephibosh
eth, a small five-year old secured a violent threat to life. In a moment, he would have been concerned with making mud, chasing small bugs, and trying to save them in his room and then, like that last thought before waking up-- it was gone. He was in danger and he didn't know it but his nursemaid did. When the shocking news came of the king's death she was holding Mephibosheth. She may have been sitting on the floor playing with blocks,he in her lap, or maybe carrying him from room to room as children that age will require. No one knows but, we do know with the child in her arms she made to flee as soon as the news met her ears. There was no time for packing or getting his toys. Only time enough to try and catch little Mephibosheth tightly into her arms and run. She knew the danger and it swept over her like a pale of a storm and in her haste to flee that very moment, she did that which she regretted her whole life: She dropped the young Mephibosheth from her arms. And he fell.
M
ephibosheth's fall was as long as a convict's gaze upon the motion of a gavel felling upon a judge's bench. In that moment, the five-year old child was condemned to a life of bounds no five-year old in all their energy and verve could ever imagine possible. Due to his fall, this young boy would most certainly be crippled for life. Perhaps, if only...maybe, if his nursemaid had taken the time to stop and get the help he would have needed after such a fall? But no, there was no time, they had need to flee! What is a child's legs if he be dead and in the ground? Those feet don't run either. Or, it could be the fall was so great that nothing could be done anyway. Certainly, the love of the nursemaid cannot be questioned as she could just have abandoned young Mephibosheth’s life the moment she heard he was a pariah. Nevertheless, Mephibosheth's life-- oh the mourning! Can you not see the great helplessness of that babe! Do you see yourself trying to catch him in his fall? Yet your reach just misses him. There, twisted and broken, laying on the earth unable to rise, weeping and heaving as if he had saved all his emotions for that very moment his life becomes doubly dangerous. Not only would that tear stained young boy that just met the space beyond reach grow to live life as a marked man but as one indefensible and completely,utterly unable. Yet it was many years later that Mephibosheth was to truly learn the peril he faced, the peril that a child may not know, but an adult would, the peril of this potential cripple usurper.


2 Samuel 4

post signature



AddThis Social Bookmark Button


Saturday, March 24, 2007

ESV Bible Blog

0 comments
I had a much longer (and far more pithy) post prepared in light of the following, but Blogger just killed it. This will have to do for now: Wow! Go check this out: ESV Bible Blog
 

Copyright 2008 All Rights Reserved Revolution Two Church theme by Brian Gardner Converted into Blogger Template by Bloganol dot com