Author: Paul Burkhart

“Do I?” (a poem)

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

[Audio for “Do I?” from upcoming book of poetry “Of Clefts and Gardens”]

Just because I’m joined to One above
does this mean I am in want of desire for
one below,
one beneath,
one under?

Do I not dream the same as you?
A joyful consummation at the end of the day
of rising and falling
rising and falling?

Of breaths and sighs
of whimpers and cries
and half taken breaths whispered in my ear
under the weight of knowing

knowing
that which was good before we Fell,
before we fell away from Him-
fell away from one another.

Let me fall back into Him, into you:
fall for you as I rise into Thy love
and thine
and mine.

Restored –
a picture thereof as my soul is known
and I know this union once more.

So can I want?  Can I dream?
Can I read the words of wisdom old
and long for your fingers to drip with myrrh
as I reach into your garden latch

and seek the rose I long to taste?

May I?

Blog-post to a Christian Nation: God-merica, pt. I

/ Paul Burkhart / 8 Comments

This is the first in a 4-part series. (And here’s Part 2, Part 3, Part 4)

I’m scared I’m going to make a lot of people mad with these.

Everyone who knows me knows I’ve been in this re-evaluative angst recently concerning the place of Christianity in the public sphere.  It happens every four years.  I go crazy for a bit going to various extremes only to get burnt out on politics in general and put it down for another 42 months or so.  I just recently moved to Philadelphia and of course, it being around the 4th of July, the place is going nuts with uber-patriotism.  Everyone and their dog (all joking aside) are decked out in their reds, whites, and blues.  Skyscrapers are graced with like-colored lights strobing across their faces and re-enactors fill the sidewalks dressed in felt imitations of 18th century garb.

Another strange thing happens every election year: the American Evangelical Religious Right machine awakens from its slumber and begins to mobilize, proselytize, and evangelize the world with God’s politics, scientific theorems, and social views as they see them.  They speak and perpetuate ideas as if they are God’s laws and create a stigma to all those that fall out of those bounds.  They have created a new Orthodoxy based and founded upon ignorance, pragmatics, extremity, and commercialism and are not afraid to brand as heretics (or worse yet, “liberals”) those thoughtful Christians that seek other possible views.

We have the Scots to thank for this by the way.  And the Second Great Awakening.  The ideals of the Scottish Enlightenment (pragmatism and the innate inalienable rights of all men but blacks) so influential on our founding fathers and the motivational power of emotionally-driven decision-based religiosity led to this whole “God-merica” thing, so you then found patriotic documents using religious language and religious documents using patriotic language.  It’s really very strange if you think about it.  Biblically speaking, when God had the chance to declare his own socio-political structure for Israel, He established the Church authority and Civic authority as SEPARATE spheres between which there was little overlap.  The religious leaders were not supposed to be the civic leaders and vice versa.  God was the real founder of the idea of separation of church and state.  Politics were never meant to be a religious issue!  Theological?  Yes.  Bit not religious.  I’ll explain in a later post.  Probably Part 3.

So what does it mean to be Christian in a political world?  Would Paul include “God Bless Rome,” and “My Empire ‘Tis of Thee” in the hymnal of his day?  Would Jesus put a yellow “Support Our Troops” ribbon-magnet-that-ruins-the-paint-job-of-your-car thing on his vehicle? (by the way: really, a ribbon magnet?  why don’t you either wear a ribbon or use a magnet?).

I want to invite people into my wrestlings right now so they can use these thoughts to form their own ideas.  The outline for these posts will be: (1) what Evangelicals want to change/keep the same; (2) why they want these things these ways; and (3) how they go about changing them.  I want to talk about how we see each of these these worked out in both modern America and the Bible.

First off, some introduction: first century Rome was everything that Evangelicals (both conservative and liberal) are so scared of America becoming.  (Starting with the conservative fears,) Entertainment was based on the ready availability of sex in the streets and the gratuitous violence of the coliseum.  Homosexuality was absolutely tolerated and actually encouraged in some philosophical circles as a higher or more beautiful form of sexuality.  The devalued human life to such a degree that various classes or types of people were seen as disposable based on convenience.  (Now to the liberals: ) Rome was a power hungry Empire seemingly unaware of the ramifications of its own actions, or just not caring.  Fear and power were their primary agents of political influence, both domestic and abroad.  The socioeconomic class disparities were large enough to fill the streets with poverty.

Though this was the case, you don’t see ANY New Testament writers bemoan the ills of society and tell Christians to try and change it NOR redeem it!  Really, think about it.  Can you remember any passage saying anything but pay your taxes (giving to Caesar), live peacefully with authorities that are around you, and obey the laws.  Think about what this means for religious political activism in the public sphere.  What does this really mean for us?

Next post: Going through the things that get Evangelicals so mad at politicians and explaining why they shouldn’t.  Things like homosexuality, entertainment, taxes, war, evolution, prayer in public schools, and even abortion.

Sex (Of Clefts and Gardens)

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

Yes, that title was mainly to catch your eye and get you reading, though it isn’t completely off topic.  I’ve been criticized recently for this blog becoming too theological and not really very personal as it used to be, so the past few posts have been my attempt at getting back to that.  Don’t worry, there’s more theology to come, I’m just taking a breather.  Anyway, as many people know, I’ve spent the past six months or so writing an album entitled “So Tearful Apologies.”  Recently I “finished” it (as any musician knows, are you ever really “finished” with your music?).  Technically, it’s not completely done, but it’s done enough for me to feel free to work on my next project, which I wanted to write this post about.

So, I’ve been on a concept album kick.  That’s where you write an album with a unified theme or story as opposed to the typical random assortment of songs.  My next project is about sex.  The working title for it is “Of Clefts and Gardens.”  Using Song of Solomon as one of my inspirations, I was wondering if a Christian in 21st century Evangelical America could write and sing art that is explicitly sexual, but both God-glorfying and beautiful.  As I’ve jokingly said, my goal is to write stuff that is completely God-glorifying but that no Christian bookstore would carry.

With this project, I want to try something different.  I’m writing it as a book of poetry and also recording performances of that poetry and writing music to go along with it in a CD.  Some will be songs, some will just have background music for the poems, but I really want to try and publish this.  I have a lot of poetry already.  I might as well start trying to get it out there.  A little bit about the book/album:

I really do want to explore sexuality in all it’s different facets in this project.  It will be broken up into four sections, each dealing with a certain part of sexuality:
(1) Purpose: exploring the symbolism and design of sexuality
(2) Passion: looking into that drive that makes us sexual
(3) Perversion: exploring the sexual brokenness in this fallen world
(4) Purity: a celebration of sex in its purest and most God-glorifying forms.

As a treat to those who made it through this whole post and apparently care, I’ve included the audio to the first track/poem from the album/book.  It’s called “Do I?” and it sets the tone for the project, asking if I, as a Christian, have as much a right to talk about these things as secular minds do (as a contrast, the last track/poem will be called “I Do” and it will be a celebration of marriage).  Feel free to leave comments, criticisms, ideas for poems/songs, or witty insults.  Here’s the poem/track.  Just click on the title for the audio:

“Do I?” from “Of Clefts and Gardens”

Just because I’m joined to One above
does this mean I am in want of desire for
one below,
one beneath,
one under?

Do I not dream the same as you?
A joyful consummation at the end of the day
of rising and falling
rising and falling?

Of breaths and sighs
of whimpers and cries
and half taken breaths whispered in my ear
under the weight of knowing

knowing
that which was good before we Fell,
before we fell away from Him-
fell away from one another.

Let me fall back into Him, into you:
fall for you as I rise into Thy love
and thine
and mine.

Restored –
a picture thereof as my soul is known
and I know this union once more.

So can I want?  Can I dream?
Can I read the words of wisdom old
and long for your fingers to drip with myrrh
as I reach into your garden latch

and seek the rose I long to taste?

May I?

Final Monologue for Acting Class

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

This is my “final exam” for my acting class I took this past spring.  I performed the death scene of Cyrano DeBergerac in the play by the same name.  He starts hallucinating all the flaws within him as real people and tries to fight them.  These flaws are what have kept him from being happy his entire life, and it is only now, as he’s dying, that he realizes this.  Thanks to film student/future director Dylan Goodwin for filming all our monologues.  Also thank you to my beard for making a cameo shortly before I left it.

For those reading this imported on facebook, you’ll have click on the “view original post” link at the bottom of this note to see the video.

Mark Nicks of Cool Hand Luke

/ Paul Burkhart / 2 Comments

Anyone that knows me well knows that my favorite band is Cool Hand Luke.  They have had this title since about my sophomore year of high school and it seems that their musical stylings have matured along with my musical tastes, leading me to love them all the more through the years.  Anyway, I saw them play a show in Newport News last night and it was absolutely incredible.  Mark Nicks, the lead singer/songwriter of the band stopped before the last song to talk for a bit and ended up preaching this seventeen minute-long sermonette that touches on everything from politics to current church trends.  Usually, bands talking for a while can get annoying, but this was awesome.  He’s so humble in what he says and so right at the same time.  So, I decided to post this up for everyone else to hear as well.

Click here for Mark’s “Sermon”

_

The Sweet Taste of Sovereign Suffering, III, (Part 5b)

/ Paul Burkhart / 2 Comments

It having been a while since I posted on this, a refresher for some may be in order. About a year and a half ago, I listened to a sermon called “Why Does God Allow Suffering?” by John Slye of Grace Community Church in Arlington, VA. The content of the message shocked me in many ways and I have slowly spent the past year and a half responding point by point to his 7-point message. I do hope to take this content and actually put it into book form some time in the future. Anyway, point 4 was the point of Slye’s that frustrated me the most, so it has been separated in to three parts. Part 5a was about God’s Sovereignty and Present Authority over Sin, this one’s about Satan, the last one will be about God’ Sovereignty in Salvation.

Once more: Slye’s point and his scriptural support:
4. God is not on the throne.

  • “…Satan, the ruler of this world…” –John 12:31(Msg)
  • “Then the devil led Jesus to the top of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and all their splendor. The devil said, ‘If you will bow down and worship me, I will give you all these things.’” –Matt. 4:8,9(NCV)
  • “The devil who rules this world…” –2 Cor. 4:4(NCV)
  • “…the world around us is under the power and control of the evil one.” –1 John 5:19(NLT)

God’s Sovereignty and Present Authority over Satan

I hope this part doesn’t get too long. The origin of Satan is never explicitly spoken of in the Bible. Most of our understanding’s come from Milton’s Paradise Lost rather than the Bible. Classically, there are two texts used to try and give Satan a story. Ezekiel 28, which is a prophecy against both the “Prince” and the “King” of the country of Tyre. The passage in question is referring to Tyre’s “King,” so the text could be a poetic expression of Satan as the “true King of Tyre” or the real power behind the “Prince.” We don’t know explicitly, but Post-Milton, it’s been generally accepted as talking about Satan. The second passage is in the middle of Isaiah 14. There’s some disagreement among scholarship as to where the passage in question begins and ends, because it is in the middle of a prophecy against Babylon, where the subject is referred to in the plural, so right when you think it’s talking about Satan it refers to “their fathers.” Long story short, it’s ambiguous. The Bible obviously doesn’t think it is a great necessity to give us Satan’s origins. So we aren’t given very much concerning Satan in the Bible, but here is what we do know that reasserts Christ’s rule and reign over all created things including him:

  • Satan is created along with Hell and his demons. Jesus, upon His ascension declares that ALL authority in heaven and earth is His, not Satan’s (Matthew 28:18-20)
  • Satan is merely another angel. The Bible declares that believers will judge over angels. (1 Corinthians 6:3)
  • Jesus came (past-tense) to earth to destroy the works of the devil (Hebrews 2:14).
  • Whenever the BIble talks about any one fighting with the devil (be it verbal or physical), it’s always angels, not God or Jesus that are described as doing so. Including the end of time. God’s ultimate “enemy” is destroyed not by God Himself, but by God’s angels (Jude 1:9; Revelation 20:1-3)
  • Genesis 3:14-16 is what theologians call the “protoevangel.” It is the first preaching of the Gospel found in the Bible. And to whom is the Gospel preached first? Satan!
  • In Job, God orders Satan around and asks questions of him. In fact, putting Job through all those things was God’s idea! He mentioned Job’s name first (Job 1:7-8). In fact after it is explicitly said Satan does specific things to Job, Job turns around and attributes these things to God. The very next verse says: “In all this, Job did not sin or charge God with wrong.” (Job 1:20-22)
  • Satan could not touch Job nor Peter without asking God (and Christ’s) permission first. (Luke 22:31)
  • The Spirit drew Jesus into the desert for temptation, Satan didn’t relentlessly pursue some showdown. Also, this time of tempting was necessary to bring establish Christ as the “Second Adam” who resisted temptation where Adam fell. So that time was preordained, planned, and executed by God, not Satan. (Mark 1:12-13, et al.)

So, this is all good and fine, but how do we resolve the very real sense of authority that the Bible seems to give Satan. I would say that Satan’s legacy is still seen in the fallen state of man and creation. But we see many examples in every day life of someone who has real authority over a given sphere, but is still answerable to one higher than themselves. Revelation 1:4-5 calls Jesus the “ruler of Kings on earth.” Another well-known name for Jesus is “King of kings.” This does not mean that there aren’t very real rulers and authority in the world, it just says that any authority they have is at the will and discretion of Christ to bring about His purposes! So does Satan have power, rule, and authority? Absolutely! But he’s on a very short leash only doing that which God allows him to do.

I’ll end with this: Does this make God responsible for what Satan does? Ehh . . . yes and no. Everything in the universe (God included) acts in accordance to their nature (Matthew 7:16-20; James 3:12). Satan is no different. His nature being corrupt and standing against all that God is and loves, Satan will only act in line with this. Thus God merely allows Satan to do what he is already inclined to do when evil or suffering enters this world. So God doesn’t make Satan be evil, BUT He does allow it for greater, better purposes that will always ultimately lead to the Glory of God and the joy of His elect.
Next, we will explore God’s sovereignty and present authority in the salvation of human souls, then move off of this point of Slye’s message.

A Theology of Acting

/ Paul Burkhart / Leave a comment

My “final exam” in this acting class I’ve been taking at VCU was on Thursday of this past week. For the class, I had to keep a “journal” to record my experiences through the course. This is one of my “entries.” I hope you all enjoy:

So where is God in acting, anyway? I really do think that all art points to and represents God in some way. So what about acting? I’ve been wrestling through this for a bit now and I’ve come to a couple of ideas:

1 – All parts of the Bible are dramatic representations of the ultimate plan of God – the Gospel. So, Abraham and Isaac, Joseph, Moses, the Exodus, the Exile, the sacraments are all dramas (“shadows” as the Bible calls them) of realities greater than the sum of these parts. SO maybe acting is true art (or more accurately, drama is) because the basic organizational structure of personality, history, and reality itself is a giant dramatic arrow pointing to God and the Gospel.

2 – Acting explores various aspects of the “Imago Dei” – or, Image of God in man. It’s purity, potential, purpose, and perversion. All these aspects of the present reality of that “thing” that makes us human are the substance of good acting. When you touch that part of us, perhaps you touch something divine. The same thing that the incarnation touched in people as Jesus – divinity in humanity – walked among us. The same thing that will be touched for all time when all God’s people adore and behold Jesus for the rest of time. This leads me to my last point.

3 – Acting could be a symbol of the Incarnation. Jesus became that which he was not (human) to such an extent He became that while not leaving the reality of who He was (divine). It is in this process of God taking on the nature of what He was not in order to redeem it, that the greatest “method acting,” if you will, was ever seen. This is a very weak and poorly developed parallel, but hopefully thought provoking nonetheless.

Indeed, these are just possibilities, but they made me think about and love Christ more, so my hope in writing this is that all of you will to.

–paul

Jesus? May I?

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

Jesus?

I sit here at this laptop, a vision bouncing ‘round my head
to write a prose to you that shows your grace, beauty, and strength.
But I’m tired and I keep typoingt ypos, over and iver again.
And you know what?  I’m not going to correct that above,
because that really was an accident.

I know, I know.  “Nothing’s new” I heard the wise one once said.
No thought, no word, no deed has the sun not shone itself upon.
Looking down, looking down upon my filthy rags, mocking and burning,
mocking and burning.  I just need to get this out!

Oh, Christ! Will thou not enable me to write these words?

He won’t.

Some may say I’m attempting some not so subtle display of irony,
trying to be original, profound, or cute; noting the use of prose to Him
as my medium for my diatribe on not being able to write a prose to Him,
but it’s not.

These words are nothing, they are filth, not fit for the King I serve.
No edits, no plans, no thoughts or “brainstorming” went into this.
Just the feeble cries of a broken man, wallowing, drowning, fighting,
losing.  It seems.

The weight of people not yet known – their souls upon my shoulders.
The sin I bear upon my back, the doubt that grows within.
I’m lost.  I’m depraved.  My futile thinking, my hardened heart,
my ignoble desires, my Glorious King! the One I have! the One I need!

Oh Christ!  Oh Sovereign Lord!  Be the God to me You are!
Oh that my tongue were loosed with the tongues of angels
to say all your Grace could say!

Let my soul take flight! Rise me into Thy Love!
Faster.  Faster!  Make me only Thine!  I need it!
I must! I lust, covet, and gluttonously gorge myself upon
the Grace I so desperately need desperately. . .

desperately.

And even with that, I end this now, not having said
what I wanted to say – what I needed to say.
Your Grace did not come, or at least in the measure I hoped.
This burden thus stays, this wineskin won’t burst,
this angst will continue to grow.

But I know, in the quietest parts of my soul, those deep whispers
and silent voices, echoing within:
my Beloved is mine and i am His, and His Grace is at His whim,
for if it were up to me, I would not need Him,

and it’s in my need I have Him most.

The Sweet Taste of Sovereign Suffering, III, (Part 5a)

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

This post will consist of the first part (of 3) of my theological response to the fourth point of John Slye of Grace Community Church in Arlington’s message called “Why Does God Allow Suffering?” I can’t believe these posts are getting so long. I really could write a book about this.

Once again, for reference, his point and references:

4. God is not on the throne.
-“…Satan, the ruler of this world…” –John 12:31(Msg)
-“Then the devil led Jesus to the top of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and all their splendor. The devil said, ‘If you will bow down and worship me, I will give you all these things.’” –Matt. 4:8,9(NCV)
-“The devil who rules this world…” –2 Cor. 4:4(NCV)
-“…the world around us is under the power and control of the evil one.” –1 John 5:19(NLT)

I struggled for a while to know how to organize this, but I think I got it. This post will talk about God’s sovereignty and present authority in (1) Sin, (2) Satan, and (3) Salvation.

(1) God’s Sovereignty and Present Authority in Sin
For this I’ll focus on God’s role in (a) the first sin in the world, (b) the greatest sin in the world, and (c) a weird Old Testament passage

(a) The First Sin – Adam’s sin – was absolutely known, ordained, and planned by God. He did not do it or make Adam do it, but it was certainly part of the plan. Let’s go to Genesis 2. The first command God ever gave man, is found in verses 16 and 17: “And the Lord commanded the man, saying ‘You may surely eat eat of every tree in the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it [alt. translation: ‘when you eat of it’] you shall surely die.” We all know the rest of the story. Adam did, and subsequently ushered in what we now call “The Fall of Man.” What part did God play in this? Notice that God did not say “you shall not eat, for if you eat of it, you shall surely die.” He said “when” you eat of it. In the Hebrew this is a statement of inevitability and foreknowledge. He pretty much says to Adam, “Hey Adam, tomorrow you’re going to eat of that fruit. Don’t do it.” God absolutely knew this was coming, and He ordained it so. Many will say, “yes He knew it was coming but because of His love for man, He let man freely decide to sin while He hoped and wished that man would not do it.” I think this is true – to an extent. Remember my last real post. God had been decreeing the Gospel from eternity past, before the world was created, and this Gospel is about saving sinners from themselves. People had to Fall according to the Will of God, that He might save them and receive Glory for it, all while God maintained His hatred for Sin.

(b) The Greatest Sin – So what was the greatest sin the world has ever known? Killing the Son of God. Surely murdering the Second Person of the Trinity – the Incarnation of all that is perfect, beautiful, and satisfying must be the most despicable act ever done. God brought it about. Isaiah 53:10 literally says of God’s role in the Messiah’s death: “it pleased the Lord to bruise him, he has put him to grief.” Even more explicit is Acts 4:24, 27-28, where the believers all sing to God saying, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, . . . truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.” His “hand,” symbolizing His exerted influence, did the predestinating here. Do not get foreknowledge and predestination mixed up. God brings about what he predestines, and most surely ordained (“anointed”) Pilate, Herod, Romans, Greeks, and Jews to freely kill the Son of God upon their own free accord, all the while being the Main Actor in the background bringing it to pass. How this works is a profound mystery I will not even pretend I understand.

(c) On a final note, I’d like to bring attention to 1 Samuel 2:25. Eli is rebuking his sons and he tells them to stop sinning against God. But verse 25 says: “But they would not listen to the voice of their father, for it was the will of the Lord to put them to death.” They sinned by disobeying the fifth commandment by not listening to their Father (Deut. 5:16), but the text says they sinned because God was willing to do something else. So, somehow, Hophni and Phineas freely sinned, but it was according to the will of God so that God could bring something about.

Next time (very shortly) we will discuss the relationship between the Sovereignty of God and Sata.

The Sweet Taste of Sovereign Suffering, III (Selah)

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

“This is not hard to see in the Bible. And it is precious beyond words! I don’t like to get angry at people who call themselves evangelicals; I don’t delight in critiquing people who have major leadership positions [who are] very popular, nice people. This is not fun. It’s heartbreaking! But what can you do when they attack the center with blasphemous cynicism? What can you do?”
— John Piper

John Piper said this concerning N.T. Wright, the British bishop who is now bringing doubt to the orthodox doctrine of Justification. When Piper said this, he was weeping. It has been haunting me these past few days. What you are reading now is my third attempt in writing this post. I keep writing a bit then having to toss it out. Each time my heart still hasn’t been in the right place.

I need to repent. My heart has not been in the right place in these rebuttals. While I feel I’ve done a good job of not letting that effect what I’ve written, sin management is still sin, and it eats you up more than most other sins. My heart has only in the past couple of days been brought to the place that Piper’s quote above comes from. As of a few days ago, I was excited. I, the “great Paul Burkhart,” have been successfully dismantling the argument of a real Pastor. I was defending the faith. I was rebuking lies. I was showing myself better suited for this task than this man. Though I never said these things, I see now this was the state of my heart. Pride. Making my theology an idol, no matter how right it may be, is still sin – and for that I am sorry.

At the end of all these posts, I intend to send them to Pastor Slye and to the person who (with glowing praise) referred me to his sermon. I let unrighteous anger and pride drive me to write, rather than love, and I need to let Slye know that I see this, and I repent. All the Bible says about us young guys is that we are strong, prideful, and foolish. The Bible knows us better than we do, and I thought I could rise above the norm for other twentysomethings. How wrong I was! “O what a wretched man I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!”

Now, I need to do the rest of this tactfully and biblically. The verses right after the verses I just quoted (Romans 7:24-25a) are as follows: “So then, I myself serve the Law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.” I think I relate to Paul here. Though with my flesh I have served the law of sin with my pride and arrogance, I still believe I have been serving the Law of God with my mind. I am still certain in the things I have been writing and writing against, I just need to repent for the heart from which I wrote them.

So, I’m going to finish this series, but I hope the tone is different. I no longer look at Slye in contempt as a heretic who needs to be rebuked and shown proper exegetical and theological integrity by the punk VCU student about to go into seminary. I go through this now as a fellow wounded sojourner, seeing why he thinks how he does. I see him as a man who stands week after week in front of God knows how many people who have been burned and hurt by the church, that come to him with their broken suffering hearts needing to know why. Needing to know God has not abandoned them. Needing to know that God is still good and they are still loved. O how calloused I’ve become because of my theology! After Lazarus dies, and Mary doubts Jesus for not being there earlier. Jesus doesn’t say, “Now now, Mary, your theology is all wrong. How dare you doubt me? O you of little faith.” No. He weeps with her, and then lives out those theological truths before her.

Though I am certain that Slye’s view on suffering is unbiblical and ultimately only leads to more cynicism and pain on behalf of the sufferer, I know that as a man who was reluctant to become Pastor in the first place (as their website says), it must have been hard when faced with the weight and realities of real life that I have yet to experience. But experience aside, the Bible is the greatest commentary and authority on true reality, and as such, I believe I have Biblical warrant to honestly and humbly show where Slye has erred in his theology.

This process now for the first time hurts me and breaks my heart. Please pray for me as I continue in this. I no longer want to do this, but the Gospel of Christ compels me, as I have seen that there is only one true comforting view in the midst of the hardest pains. And that is the view of a loving Father who lets nothing touch you that does not first pass through his loving, ordaining hand such that all things that come our way have been ordained and brought to pass ultimately by a God working for our good – building us into the strong, persevering, hope-filled, Glory-loving, broken clay vessels that we need to be to truly enjoy Him and fully worship Him when He finally takes us home.

“For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be glory forever. Amen.”

Selah

The Sweet Taste of Sovereign Suffering, III (Part 4 of 7)

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

This entire post will be dedicated just to the point of Slye’s sermon that made me the most frustrated. Actually, the next two posts will be. This will just cover my problems with his method of Biblical Interpretation. The next post will be my theological reasons. His point is as follows:

4. God is not on the throne.
-“…Satan, the ruler of this world…” –John 12:31(Msg)
-“Then the devil led Jesus to the top of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and all their splendor. The devil said, ‘If you will bow down and worship me, I will give you all these things.’” –Matt. 4:8,9(NCV)
-“The devil who rules this world…” –2 Cor. 4:4(NCV)
-“…the world around us is under the power and control of the evil one.” –1 John 5:19(NLT)

My problems with this point are three-fold: Exegetical, Theological, and Psychological/Spiritual

I: Exegetical: This word “exegetical” is just a big word for “Bible Interpretation.” That’s my first problem with this point in the sermon – Slye’s methods of Biblical Interpretation. Here are some fatal flaws in his methods to consider.

– Translation jumping: First off, one should be wary of an any preacher that jumps around among different translations. On this point alone, 3 out of 4 of the quotations are different translations. In the whole sermon, he jumps among 5 different translations. Many times when translation jumping is done it can be a sign of a pastor that has an opinion first and then tries to find Scripture to support that opinion. He will then try and find the translation that best “fits” his opinion. This is not the sign of a preacher that has submitted himself to Scripture as the authority over his own opinions, but rather a man who sees Scripture as the most widely accepted authority he can appeal to bring validation to what he wants to say. I don’t know if this applies to Slye specifically, I’m simply giving the reader something to look out for. One more little read flag: always be scared of a preacher using a shotgun smattering of Biblical quotes with as many ellipses (the dot dot dots…) as Slye uses. All Scripture should be used with consideration given to its context, not dotting it away.

– Ignoring the original language: This is related to translation jumping. I’m not even close to having had any real training in Greek or Hebrew, but with the tools available to anyone on the internet, there is no excuse for pastors blatantly ignoring the original text. Some ways this damages this message:

[“ . . . Satan, the ruler of this world . . .” –John 12:31(Msg); The word “Satan” is not found in the original language, and the word “ruler” in the Greek is actually only “prince.” More on this later]

[“The devil who rules this world . . .” — 2 Cor 4:4(NCV); The original reads “the god of this world has blinded the mind of the unbelievers . . .” The words “devil” and “rules” are not in the Greek. In fact, the word “god” in this passage is the word “Theos.” Out of the 1330 times this word is used in the New Testament, all but 10 of those times it is translated in a way referring exclusively to the true God of the Bible. So while there is some disagreement as to which translation is best in this passage, we can be sure that the seeming “clarity” of Slye’s translation is not the clarity that the passage actually gives us.]

[“ . . . the world around us is under the power and control of the evil one.” –1 John 5:19; The original reads word-for-word “we know that we are from God and the whole world lies in wickedness [or evil, or the evil one].” Based on the translation of the previous verse (5:18), it seems that the translation of “evil one” is right, but there is the chance this could be just “wickedness.” Nevertheless, “lies” is still very different in connotation than “under the power and control of”]

Sorry folks, translation matters.

– Ignoring context: I talked some about this in my ellipses comment earlier, but none of the verses he quotes actually means what he’s trying to have them mean. None of them!

[John 12:31 – This is in the middle of a statement by Jesus about his crucifixion saying “now will the prince of this world be cast out.” Hardly a statement of Satan’s authority.]

[Matthew 4:8,9 – Slye argues this would not be a legitimate temptation if all the kingdoms of the world were not Satan’s to give. Except one problem: Jesus. Our Lord’s response to Satan after this temptation is “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only you shall serve’” (4:10[ESV];the next verse). Jesus pretty much tells Satan he has not the authority to give what he’s trying to! This is not Slye’s use of the verse.]

[2 Cor 4:4 – verses 3 and 4 say, “even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. In their case the god or this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (ESV). In context it seems that the actual power of the “god of this world” only extends to those perishing, not to those who have been redeemed. On a funny side note, the verse before this is describing pastors who are pure in their preaching before God, and he mentions how these preachers refuse “to tamper with God’s word.” I find it interesting that Paul mentions this just two verses before our verse that was taken out of context by a preacher.]

[1 John 5:19 – verse 18 and 19 together say “We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him. We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one” (ESV). Not only do these verses tell of God’s power over Satan to not let him touch any of His children, but the “whole world” is established as the contrast to the “we.” I don’t think the “we” is talking about the institution of the church. If that were the case, one could argue the “whole world” meant the actual institution of reality we call “the world.” I think the “we” is referring to a group of people that are Christians, which would make the contrast here at the people level, not the institution level. This means the “whole world” probably only refers to people that are unsaved, not the world itself.]

I’ll just give this all to you now to hold you over while I really wrestle through the real meat of this post.

The Sweet Taste of Sovereign Suffering, III (Part 3 of 7)

/ Paul Burkhart / 2 Comments

3. Suffering is not the will of God.

-“Then God looked over all he had made, and he saw that it was excellent in every way.” –Gen. 1:31(NLT) If He wanted it there, He would have put it there in the beginning.


Once again, I see his point, but his logic is off. It makes sense at first, but how disastrous would this be if carried to its logical ends? So much was not here at this “excellent” (or “very good” as most translations say) state, the most important being Jesus. This creates a problem for Slye’s view. This makes Jesus’ death an after thought or plan B. Ephesians 1 tells us that God chose and predestined us for adoption before the foundation of the world. This means God at least knew (if not purposed) that we would be found at some point alienated from his family and in need of adoption. Also, we see in 1 Corinthians 2:7 that the Gospel is “a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory.” God decreed the Gospel before he created all things. The word for “decreed” in the Greek “proorizo” literally means to set limits to beforehand, predestine, determine beforehand, or ordain. God did all this to the “Gospel.” So what is the Gospel? It is not, “God created all things good and that was it.” That was not the plan. Before God created, the secret wisdom he set forth to reveal and get glory from was not a creation that was “excellent” and stayed that way. I would go far enough to say that he never intended on his creation to stay “very good.” He intended the Gospel to be put into action, so he might be glorified in it. So once more, what is the Gospel? It is “the power of God for salvation” (Romans 1:16), the justifying of all peoples through the seed of Abraham (Galatians 3:8), and the repentance of sinners (Matthew 4:17, 23). This plan God intended all along before he created that “very good” world was the wisdom of saving fallen men and women that they might be freed from their bondage to sin and suffering to glorify and enjoy God for all time. The Fall of Man was intended from the beginning, as part of God’s master plan, the Gospel. That glorious Gospel that would have been unnecessary if sin had not entered this “very good” world.

But why would God do this? This is difficult, but I think there are hints in the Bible. In Luke 15:7, Jesus says, “I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.” In Revelation, God is worshipped for being the lamb that was slain that saved from every tribe, tongue, and nation. Here’s the key to this whole thing, I think: as Luke shows, there is something that brings more glory, joy, and worship to God about something that was good falling and Him redeeming it than if it had never fallen at all. Think about it: if the Fall had never happened, God would never be worshipped as Savior and Redeemer, as He desires to be. I hope this helps some.

I hate leaving this post here. I know it seems all I’ve done is taken the discussion too far to the other side of the spectrum and presented an image of a cold, unfeeling, unloving God who is not worth of our worship. I must tell you now this is not the case! This God is infinitely beautiful, glorious, loving, satisfying, and worth all praise and adoration, you must know that. I just hate I have not the room in this post to show how this all fits together. I intend to do this at the end of these three posts, to wrap up all I’ve said and root it and found it in the beautiful Gospel. If you can’t wait, and still have questions, feel free to drop me a line or read my previous blog posts on this topic (part 1 and part 2) for a full treatment there.

I hope this has been edifying, and expect many more updates, much more frequently. Have a wonderful and glorious day.

The Sweet Taste of Sovereign Suffering, III (Part 2 of 7)

/ Paul Burkhart / Leave a comment

This begins my three part rebuttal to a sermon preached by John Slye called “Why Does God Allow Suffering?” His sermon is comprised of seven points, and I will respond to the first three in this post. Here are his points followed by my response:

1. God is all powerful.

Surprisingly, I actually disagree with Slye here — in a way. I agree with the statement in and of itself, but I disagree with him saying it. This isn’t actually a point in his argument. Rather, this is his “pastoral reasssurance” to his people. He’s pretty much saying, “God has no control or power over people, Satan, or nature that results in suffering. But don’t worry. God is all powerful.”

What?

Is this really the comfort we try and give people going through the inevitable pain and suffering this world will bring our way? That God is either unloving (has the power to stop pain but won’t) or totally impotent (would stop suffering but can’t). Either God is all powerful, or He isn’t. I just don’t see how you can be honest with the people entrusted to you and preface your message with this statement and then deliver to them what the rest of this message does.

2. God uses suffering, he does not cause it. God does not send all things. Scripture never says this.

-“And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” –Romans 8:28(ESV)

Slye is saying that God does not send all things. Rather he takes the bad things that happen due to sin and Satan and then “rearranges” and/or “works them out” for the good of all people. Bad things don’t come from a good God, only good things. Many, many pastors and laypeople think this. They preach it, they believe it, and counsel with it. It is an understandable opinion about how God works, I must admit. As I said in my previous post, Slye has a complete “theodicy,” or justification of God for suffering. The problem is, it just isn’t biblical. Let’s start general and get specific.

First, Slye actually says, “God does not send all things.” he quotes the above oft quoted verse to try and show this, but if he had only read Romans for three more chapters, he would have found Romans 11:33-36 which says “Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor? Or who has given a gift that he might be repaid? For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen” (emphasis added). This verse not only says all things are from God, but that this is the foundation of praise to Him!

Second, Slye says God does not send acts and deeds of suffering. Job 1:20-22 tells of Job’s response to the acts of suffering he endures. Scripture clearly says that Satan was the orchestrator of all the things that took Job’s most precious things away from him. In response to these deeds of Satan, Job “arose and tore his robe and shaved his head and fell on the ground and worshipped. And he said, ‘Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked I shall return. The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.’ In all this Job did not sin or charge God with wrong” (emphasis added). Once more, Scripture tells us these deeds originated in the will and intention of God Himself, and that this is a foundation and grounds for praise! I will get to a more comprehensive theology of Satan in suffering in the next post.

Thirdly, Slye says that God is not the cause of the evil power that suffering acts stem from. In perhaps one of the most striking verses of Scripture, God says through the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 45:6b-7, “I am the Lord, and there is no other. I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the lord, who does all these things.” The word translated here as “calamity” is the Hebrew word “rah.” The same word is used in the phrase “tree of the knowledge of good and rah.” Over 80% of the time this word is translated “evil.” Of the three verbs presented here (“form,” “make,” and “create”), God chooses “create” to describe what he does to darkness and evil. Of the three verbs, not only is this the strongest and most intimate one, but it is the only one that is only ever applied to God and to no one else. Not people, nature, rulers, or Satan.

I hope these verses show that the whole of Scripture is clear in God’s role is suffering. It is ordained, purposed, used, and willed by our loving Father for our good. I will expand on this in coming posts.

The Sweet Taste of Sovereign Suffering, III (Part 1 of 7)

/ Paul Burkhart / Leave a comment

As said in the previous post, I’m in the process of writing a rebuttal to Pastor John Slye’s sermon on suffering. You can look at that post for more background.

Before this discussion begins, I feel I must give a few background comments giving the context in which this debate takes place. The theological study of evil and suffering in the world and how it relates to God is called Theodicy (pronounced “Thee-ah-di-see”). This word comes from the Greek “Theos” meaning “God,” and “dike” meaning “justice.” So the study of theodicy is very literally a justification of the goodness of God in spite of the evil and suffering in the world. From that perspective, both Slye and I have a comprehensive and good Theodicy – we both have justifications of God that make sense and fully answer the questions raised on this issue by those that raise them.

Thus, the only thing that makes one Theodicy better than another is not how it “makes sense” or “sounds good” or “appeals to our senses,” it must be on how it fits with God’s objective revelation of himself, Scripture. You may say to me, “but . . . Slye has Scripture to support every one of his points!” Yes, he does, which makes my job more difficult, because I can’t just throw more Scripture at him that opposes what he says. A basic tenet in logic and debate is that it is not enough to expose the weaknesses in your opponent’s arguments; you must show your’s to be superior as well, else your’s can be thought to be just as invalid as the argument you just effectively dismantled. So how will I need to do this?

I will have to appeal to the totality of Scripture as God has revealed Himself, not just do as Slye has done and find bits and pieces of Scripture that support notions he already has. My argument must be founded upon the Nature of God as He has revealed Himself in the totality of Scripture, not just here or there. It is from this background of who God is that we will move forth into looking into how he acts, because His actions are preceded by His nature.

I think this is something Slye has missed. Slye has found a system of thought that, with all due respect, will help him and his people sleep well at night, but is disingenuous to God as He has revealed Himself in Scripture as the all-reigning, all-sovereign, all-living God of the universe that we can trust and rest in even through our darkest, most difficult times in life.

Believe me, I’m living it.

Part 1 to come. Anyone that actually wants to gain a comprehensive insight into these things is encouraged to re-read my previous two posts, especially part 1, as I will reference much of the content of those posts in my arguments against this sermon. Here they are: Part 1, Part 2

God bless all, and please know I do this not for argument’s sake, but to defend the name, honor, and Glory of my amazing, beautiful, sovereign Savior Jesus Christ. I truly believe a truer picture of Him is the key to abundant life and the “renewal of your mind.”

I love you all,

–paul

p.s. – these posts will be the strangest birthday gifts I’ve ever given.