Comments on: Tim Challies Blog Tour

By: Randy Hurst

Randy Hurst — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:44:57 +0000

I am an old Jesus Freak from the early 70's, that cut his musical teeth (I am a musician too) on the Beatles and Cream. When I found folks like Keith Green making music to worship and challenge, I found a wonderful ave of expression for my own “tastes”. I still loved singing the old hymns in church, but my 8-track player was still a mixed bag…so yes I understand the need for transcultural expression and am not judging a particular musical expression. I am speaking more to things like the “entertainmentization” of worship that minimalizes the individual's involvement in the corporate worship of God & the celebritization of the leadership; the commercialization and proliferation of Jesus trinkets… need I go on? Thanks for giving me incentive to clarify.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 05:24:16 +0000

“Pop thought” in the church is one thing. Don't even get me started on the prosperity gospel or the doctrines of self-esteem, and how THEY affect our ability to merely live in this world, much less discern. BUT. When are we going to stop criticizing the churches who choose to rejoice for the grace that has been freely given? How arrogant are we to think that God is only honored and pleased with worship that is sober when He has given us EVERYTHING! (What do you think the angels and saints in Heaven are doing?) A person whose soul is rescued by God has no other choice but to magnify the LORD. If this looks like a secular adaptation or cultural thing, then it's because it is. God's not telling us He loves and saves some harp and lyre or congregational singing or organ-playing version of us. In 2008, we play instruments like the electric guitar, and that's who He is saving today. The way a church worships (and I'm strictly talking about the praise and worship, not true worship which plays out in everyday life) should always always always reflect the hearts of the people in the church who have been pulled from death to life. Otherwise, it is just religion, which damns. I just wonder sometimes, if God, who opposes the proud, looks down and smiles over the people who may not have it all together theologically, usually through no fault of their own. But instead, is He honored by the fact that they are broken people who simply plead the blood of Christ? Please excuse any misunderstanding I may have taken in your comment, and the fact that I ramble. I do not make a habit of commenting, or blogging for that matter. Challies, have not yet read your book, but enjoy the blog.

By: Randy Hurst

Randy Hurst — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:23:36 +0000

“Culture exults humanity and human reason to the place of divinity, determining that in our own minds we can prove that God does not exist. We elevate reason above the one who created it. In this cultural atmosphere it is increasingly difficult for Christians to have a realistic, biblical assessment of their own nature and hence their own depravity.”

I would like to see more feedback on this cultural elevation of reason. Theorizing about the heavenly is interesting, but there is so much on this side of heaven to keep sorting out. Too many churches have become reflective adaptations of culture. The discerning believer can see the creeping crud of secularism all over the pop thinking and worship in much of the church. Tim's book is timely and greatly needed. His own gift of discernment was obviously on full perk when he chose this topic.

By: Aaron Snell

Aaron Snell — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:24:57 +0000

I think "discern", Biblically, is not so much an abstract theoretical grasp of something's goodness or badness as it is knowledge so as to act in a certain way. This is an important distinction to make, so as to avoid equivocation on this term. We will (probably) cognitively understand what evil is in heaven (or in the resurrection, if you prefer), but we will no longer have to discern in our actions. It seems as if Roger is using the first sense of "discern", whereas Tim is using the second.

By: Amy

Amy — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:21:53 +0000

And to clarify, I think those aspects of God's character would have been present whether or not we ever saw them in action. Our sin and suffering simply reveals them to us.

By: Amy

Amy — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:19:24 +0000

Were Adam and Eve, prior to the Fall, able to praise God's goodness?

Hmmmm…Maybe not as fully as we will be able to after we've experienced God's mercy and seen His judgment. Our suffering now helps us to see more aspects of God's character and perfection than we ever would have seen had there been no fall.

By: Aaron Snell

Aaron Snell — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:18:18 +0000

I should add: positively defining “goodness” as the compliment of “evil” may be problematic. “Goodness” exists with or without “evil”; God was good before any evil entered the picture, and would have been good if evil never had.

By: Aaron Snell

Aaron Snell — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:13:41 +0000

Roger,

I think I'm on board with your point, but this is interesting:

“I would suggest that in order to praise God's goodness, which I assume we will do in heaven, we will have to know the difference between good and evil.”

Were Adam and Eve, prior to the Fall, able to praise God's goodness?

By: Roger

Roger — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:11:19 +0000

Also, while there will be no evil in heaven, I'm not sure we should say evil ceases to exist. Hell will exist as well, and the people there will still harbor evil in their hearts against God.

By: Roger

Roger — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:09:41 +0000

I don't see any reason to believe that once in heaven we forget everything we experienced before getting there. Given the definition of discernment being “the ability to distinguish good from evil,” I think we will see God's goodness clearly distinguished from the evil He's conquered. We will still know that evil exists, that God has conquered it, and God's utter goodness will be evident in contrast to it.