| Author | Message | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 548 Registered: 7-2005 |
Are you able to think painfully but realistically about suffering for around 50 minutes? Suffering is a subject that is tough by definition. This week, between writing my comments for the SS quarterly, I did my best to follow the Together For the Gospel Conference where around 7000 people, mostly pastors, gathered together to be shaped for their difficult task of spreading the gospel. The conference was as good as I expected and ended with an approach to suffering that was realistic and honorable to the Lord. At the end of my post you'll find a link to streaming video (it may be downloaded from mozilla firefox with the addon download helper) with two pastors talking about suffering. The first is Matt Chandler who, at the last Thanksgiving day came abruptly into contact with something he later discovered to be a brain cancer that is able to kill him in a short time. If it is tough for somebody who's suffering right know to listen what a pastor has to say, perhaps Matt, a pastor himself, will have a better chance to be heard. Next comes C.J. Mahaney who gives a message that goes to the heart of the problem and highlights how the gospel empowers in the midsts of suffering. But if you are prone to forget or to think lightly about what is said, I still hope that the prayer at the end, with the leading pastors of the conference laying hands on Matt Chandler and with John Piper praying for Matt will give you a glimpse of what is a prayer in faith which honors God and respects his sovereignty in times of suffering. If you forget everything, at least, hope that you will not forget the prayer and the way in which God is approached in that prayer. The link for the video is found here. I am profoundly humbled by this man's suffering for the glory of God. You can find more about his trial of faith here, in an article entitled Suffering Well: Pastor's faith tested by cancer. Soli Deo Gloria To God be the Glory Gabriel | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 976 Registered: 3-2009 |
Wonderful prayer. Listening to this Matt's talk, he mentions the incident of a man who had brain surgery and afterward he did not loved the Lord anymore. Couldn't even remember that he loved the Lord. A question came to my mind. We believe that when we are born again the Lord comes to live in our spirits. Being born again means that our spirits were resurrected and the Lord is now living there. When this man had surgery and could not have any love for the Lord, what happened? Is our spirit in the brain and if a part of the brain where our spirit is is cut off, then our spirit will not be there any more? If the spirit is our main been, who survives when we die, how come this man could not have any love for the Lord because a part of his brain was cut off? Why was not his spirit responding to Jesus? Questions, questions. Can anyone clarify this for me? Hec | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 549 Registered: 7-2005 |
Matt said that this case was debated in a course of Christian ethics which functioned as a disturbing factor for him when he contemplated brain surgery, even if he was not sure if the case was true or not. It was something discussed in Matt's college years, a long time ago. Starting at 12:40 and end at around 13:20, the point of debate was if the person was truly a believer or not.
You assume two things that are not part of the story: 1 the case of this man was real while Matt had not presented it as a real case but rather as a hypothetical case which generated debate in the college 2 the man was a true believer, while in reality those who attempted to analyze the situation had not assumed that the man was a true believer, actually this was the point of debate raised by the particular situation. It follows that you don't have a case in this situation as proof that the spirit doesn't survive the body. Apart from the question regarding the reality of the story, the truth about man's soul should be established starting with the infallible revelation of the Bible by interpreting particular experiences from the perspective gained from the Bible, rather the other way around. It is backward theology to start with the experience and our fallible understandings about it and let this subjective perception control the interpretation of the Bible Coming back to the subject of suffering in the light of God's gospel, the words of the old hymn How Firm a Foundation are an accurate portrayal of the reality:
Blessings Gabriel | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1950 Registered: 4-2000  |
Gabriel, Many thanks for sharing that heartfelt prayer by John Piper for Matt Chandler. Notice that Piper stated in his prayer, "We hate our sins." Until we get to the point of actually hating our sins, we cannot expect transformation in our lives. Repentance involves being truly sorry for our sins with the resolve to not repeat them through God's grace and power. Yes, Matt has something that Job never had; namely, the knowledge of a personal Savior and Substitute, Jesus Christ. Indeed, we are blessed to live on this side of the Cross. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 978 Registered: 3-2009 |
Gabriel, Take it easy. I'm not trying to make a case for for the spirit not surviving the body. I'm firmly established on that point. All I'm doing is asking a question out of pure curiosity. I'm sure that some SDA would ask that question and I would like to know how to answer it. Hec | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 575 Registered: 11-2005 |
Thanks for sharing this Gabriel. Matt Chandler has become one of my favorite pastors, and watching him go through this trial with such faithfulness has been a huge inspiration to me. Interestingly, it's Matt Chandler who "introduced" me to John Piper. I have been very blessed by Piper's teachings. Both of these men are awesome men of God who are being used to lead people to God. Grace | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 550 Registered: 7-2005 |
Ok, Hec, you played the devil's advocate. I think that my answer to adventists in this case will be the same answer I put forward. I will direct them to go to the Bible first instead of using their perception of the world in order to interpret the Bible through their lens. Gabriel | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 135 Registered: 9-2006 |
Hec said, "Is our spirit in the brain and if a part of the brain where our spirit is cut off, then our spirit will not be there any more? If the spirit is our main been, who survives when we die, how come this man could not have any love for the Lord because a part of his brain was cut off? Why was not his spirit responding to Jesus?" Hec, your questions are good about the location of our spirits within our bodies, and like Jackob, you believe there is an immaterial spirit living within us. The story of the man who lost brain function and "love for the Lord" lacks details, so we can only discuss this hypothetically. Loss of brain function in believers is often brought up as an argument against a human spirit by Adventists and others who hold to a purely physical soul. Also, you can check out Jackob's commentary last week on the topic of spirit/body, especially Day 5, in "Bible Studies for Adventists." As Jesus told Nicodemus, flesh and spirit are different entities with very different properties. We can see the effects of a spirit, but we cannot predict or control its arrival or departure. The Bible does not locate spirit in any organ of our bodies, although spirit can rule any and all parts. Our minds intimately connect with our spirits, but the two entities are not the same. In the same way, our spirits can dwell in our minds, but because spirit is not physical, it is able to command all our "inward parts." As Jesus told the Samaritan woman, worship in spirit is worship that is not located in time or space, but in another realm. That also means that true worship does not come out of a supplement bottle or in an exercise regimen. It is true that our brains appear to be the seat of the mind, emotions and thoughts, but even there, we have evidence that the mind has properties and abilities which are not limited to mere physical brain activites. There are core mental functions that are "nonlocal" in the brain, such as memory and personal identity. Even more so, our spirits are not limited by the structures of our physical brains. Our spirits don't need to have a strongly functioning cerebral cortex or frontal lobe to remain in touch with God. In the body of Christ, the smartest people with the best mental health have no advantage over the mentally disabled. There is no neuro or psychological exam that could be created to predict spiritual life or response to God. Psychotropic medications may improve our mental health, but not our walk with God. No malignant tumor or even the most drastic brain surgery can damage or abort your new birth. If you have the Son, you have life. Micah 4:6 & 7 "In that day" says the Lord, "I will assemble the lame, I will gather the outcast and those whom I have afflicted; I will make the lame a remnant, and the outcast a strong nation; so the Lord will reign over them in Mt. Zion from now on, even forever. Martin C | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11148 Registered: 12-2003  |
Very good post, Martin. You explained things so clearly. Colleen | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 979 Registered: 3-2009 |
Thanks, Martin for the explanation. Hec | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 554 Registered: 7-2005 |
Martin, I forgot to thank you for appreciating my commentary on the SS quarterly. I believe that all contributors and the editor also should be appreciated for what they are doing, because there is no easy task in dealing with the lessons. While the lessons may appear to be easy, just try to identify what is behind the surface and you'll enter in a mess of ideas. Practically the one who's writing has to do a double effort: first he needs to make sense from what the adventists are taught in the lesson. The great irony is that the adventists themselves who are reading the lessons are hardly aware of what they are learning, nevertheless what is said unconsciously affect them. The one who's going to comment on the lesson should first understand what is written better than the average adventist, connect the dots, and next deal with the real issue which almost always is behind the scene, somewhere in the remote areas of the adventist thinking. Saying that all of this stuff is disturbing is an understatement. Adventists should be grateful that these heretics, as they call us, are willing to do what they are not, to dig deep in their theology. If they would realize how dirty this task is ... Gabriel | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 136 Registered: 9-2006 |
Ah, so true Gabriel. And I hope more people will read your commentary along with the others. The lessons are truly a "mess of ideas," and most of the readers don't know what they're reading. I think you really hit it, "nevertheless what is said (will) unconsciously affect them." There is a strong undercurrent of unclear, but nevertheless powerful, ideas in these lessons. This is true with all the authors. There is more than just an inability to articulate thoughts or just plain ignorance of scripture. There is a slipperiness and evasiveness about it all which I find maddening to pinpoint. In America we have a tradition at fairs where a contest is held of who can catch the greased pig. We have chased quite a few of these little squealing monsters, and I've often needed a spiritual bath. Maybe they "grease" themselves because: 1. Adventists are a very diverse lot, with many ideas, and the leadership doesn't want to offend them. So, like politicians, they play games with words to make the constutuents feel they are understood. The less of substance was said, the better. 2. They are anticipating the critics and heretics like us who will dissect their words. Slippery words have built-in deniability: "You took it out of context, I didn't really mean that, don't be mean-spirited..." 3. They are steeped in a theology, culture, and spirit of deception. 4. They haven't "dug deep into their theology." Keep on writing, my friend. Martin C | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11156 Registered: 12-2003 |
Gabriel and Martin, you have said it SO WELL!! The SS lessons are deceptively shallow and "Benign". Yet their smooth assumptions are built on a false foundation, and that foundation itself is what colors every Adventist's reading of the actual words in the lessons. I'm so amazed at the depth and clarity of the commentary writers and the ways they suddenly shine the light of truth on the dark confusion hidden just under the surface of those lessons. Indeed, keep writing, Gabriel, Martin, Phil, Richard Peifer, Steve, Terry...and others! I learn from you! Check out the commentaries at www.BibleStudiesforAdventists.com Colleen | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 641 Registered: 5-2002 |
The serpent was more subtle than any other creature in the garden. Adventism is more subtle than any other heterodox Christian sect. Obvious heresy is easy to counter. Subtle heresy is much more difficult and requires specialized knowledge and skill. Some have said that counter-Adventist apologetics is akin to trying to nail Jell-O to the wall. |
