Schaeffer on Faith

Living in the second half of the twentieth century, we must keep on saying what faith is, in the biblical sense. Christian faith is never faith in faith. Christian faith is never without content. Christian faith is never a jump in the dark. Christian faith is always believing what God has said. And Christian faith rests upon Christ's finished work on the cross.

--Francis Schaeffer, "True Spirituality" p. 78

Lift High the Cross

The Presbyterian church I have been attending since I've arrived in Lincoln has been great for many reasons, but one of my favorite aspects of weekly worship at Grace Chapel is singing the great hymns of the faith (modern arrangements with modern instrumentation, yes, but the hymns nonetheless). This morning we sang one I was familiar with from my days in my old Lutheran church, but had nearly forgotten about. The words are, as usual, wonderful. Enjoy.

Lift High the Cross
by George W. Kitchin, Michael R. Newbolt, and Sydney H. Nicholson

Refrain

Lift high the cross, the love of Christ proclaim,
Till all the world adore His sacred Name.

Led on their way by this triumphant sign,
The hosts of God in conquering ranks combine.

Refrain

Each newborn servant of the Crucified
Bears on the brow the seal of Him Who died.

Refrain

O Lord, once lifted on the glorious tree,
As Thou hast promised, draw the world to Thee.

Refrain

So shall our song of triumph ever be:
Praise to the Crucified for victory.

Refrain

Christopher Neiswonger on Calvinism

The coolest co-host not to be on an Apologetics.com podcast this year (Chris Neiswonger) is doing a series at his blog on Calvinism.

A recent spate of Calvinism, Part One
A recent spate of Calvinism, Part Two
A recent spate of Calvinism, Part Three
A recent spate of Calvinism, Part Four
A recent spate of Calvinism, Part Five

As always, I appreciate his words.

I do find it interesting, as he points out in Part Three, that the idea that man, in his fallen state and apart from the grace of God, is inclined to sin is held basically across denominational lines. I'm not sure that I'd ever given much thought to what different denominations hold on this, but it makes sense. The question then is, since we need grace to do good, where will it come from? And that is where they start to diverge.

Schaeffer on the Supernatural Universe

The Bible insists that we live in reality in a supernatural universe. But if we remove the objective reality of the supernatural universe in any area, this great reality of Christ the bridegroom bringing forth fruit through us immediately falls to the floor, and all that Christianity is at such a point is a psychological and sociological aid, a mere tool. [...] In Julian Huxley's concept of romantic evolutionary humanism, religion has a place, not because there is any truth in it, but because in the strange evolutionary formation, man as he now is simply needs it. [...] We are merely shut up to anthropology, psychology, and sociology, and all that we say about religion in general--and Christianity specifically--falls to the ground except as it relates to a mere psychological mechanism. All the reality of Christianity rests upon the reality of the existence of a personal God, and the reality of the supernatural view of the total universe.

--Francis A. Schaeffer, "True Spirituality", p. 56

Schaeffer on Christian Mysticism

Here is true Christian mysticism. Christian mysticism is not the same as non-Christian mysticism, but I would insist that it is not a lesser mysticism. Indeed, eventually it is a deeper mysticism, for it is not based merely on contentless experience, but on historic, space-time reality--on propositional truth. One is not asked to deny reason, the intellect, in true Christian mysticism. And there is to be no loss of personality, no loss of the individual man. In Eastern mysticism--for which the West is searching so madly now that it has lost the sense of history, of content, and the truth of biblical facts--there is always finally a loss of the personality. You will remember the story of Shiva, who is one of the Hindu manifestations of the Everything. He came and loved a mortal woman. Shiva put his arms around the woman in his love, and immediately she disappeared, and he became neuter. This is Eastern mysticism. It is grounded in the loss of personality of the individual. Not so in Christian mysticism. Christian mysticism is communion with Christ. It is Christ bringing forth fruit through me, the Christian, with no loss of personality and without my being used as a stick or a stone, either.

--Francis Schaeffer, "True Spirituality," p. 49 (emphasis mine)

On the beauty of the hymn and the tragedy of its loss

I while back, I posted about a specific experience I had with hymns one Sunday morning. I had also talked with Jordan previously about writing this current post, as I have recently (in the last year or so) become a cheerleader for hymns. I want to share a bit about my experience, and make a case for singing more hymns in our churches today.

As I may (or may not) have mentioned before, I grew up in a very conservative, traditional Lutheran church. I didn't hate it, but I definitely did not love it. One of the reasons I would give for not liking it very much was the fact that the music was (and is still) very old-fashioned: hymns accompanied by organs. And I'm not here to give a defense of organ-playing in churches; that's not the issue. I don't think it's a "dead instrument" by any means, but that is not what I'm writing about. I cannot tell you now whether it was the hymns or the instruments they were played on that I disliked, but regardless, I did not see the beauty in any of it.

How foolish I was!

It may take a certain amount of maturity to see the beauty in hymns, I acknowledge that. The same way one does not expect a seven-year-old child to see the beauty of the language of Shakespeare, one cannot expect that same seven-year-old child to see the beauty of the following gorgeous hymn we sang just yesterday at Grace Chapel:

Come, Ye Sinners, Poor and Needy
by Joseph Hart, 1759

Come, ye sinners, poor and needy,
Weak and wounded, sick and sore;
Jesus, ready, stands to save you,
Full of pity, joined with power.
He is able, He is able;
He is willing; doubt no more.

Come, ye weary, heavy laden,
Bruised and broken by the fall;
If you tarry 'til you're better,
You will never come at all.
Not the righteous, not the righteous;
Sinners Jesus came to call.

Lo! The Incarnate God, ascended;
Pleads the merit of His blood.
Venture on Him; venture wholly,
Let no other trust intrude.
None but Jesus, none but Jesus
Can do helpless sinners good.

Let not conscience make you linger,
Not of fitness fondly dream;
All the fitness He requireth
Is to feel your need of Him.

The song is a wonderful reminder of our brokenness and God's call. The second verse brings me to tears. There are a few different contemporary praise songs that I could think to compare it to (as far as content is concerned), but none that even approach the majesty or poetry of the language. But this is a song of another era, an era that put more emphasis on the life of the mind. And that, I think, is the key.

In mid-April, the Apologetics.com crew tackled the relationship between Christianity and Aesthetics. It's a great listen (as are the majority of their shows), and somewhere in the last hour (maybe even the last half-hour), a caller suggests that the reason the Church in general has fled from the richer, more beautiful expressions of the faith found in hymns is that our superficial culture simply cannot handle the depth presented in them. Initially, my reaction was "that can't be it!" -- however, as I thought about it, I have come to the conclusion that they were, in fact, correct. Most observers of culture (be they Christian or secular) are of the opinion that American culture as a whole is becoming more and more vacuous. The church, in particular, suffers from this. Is the answer, then, to encourage it by eschewing the singing of songs of theological content and poetic beauty? It seems to me that doing so only exacerbates the problem. The last church I was a member of (while I love it very much and would generally make the case that they are a bastion of thinking Christians) frustrated me on this point by allowing only one hymn per Sunday service. I understand that they aim to be seeker-friendly (though I don't think that is necessarily a good quality in a church), but I never, never understood that rule.

Does it take more effort to find the beauty in a hymn? Absolutely. Although it is generally pretty apparent, it can take some quality thought (especially by today's standards) to follow the verses and see their meaning. However, it is so, so worth it that to cut out hymns simply so we don't have to think so hard is embarrassing.

More later, if I think of something.
-Mike

Schaeffer on the importance of Christ's death

If we forget the absolute uniqueness of Christ's death, we are in heresy. As soon as we set aside or minimize, as soon as we cut down in any way, as the liberals of all kinds do in their theology, on the uniqueness and substitutionary character of Christ's death, our teaching is no longer Christian. On the other hand, let us remember the other side of the matter. If we forget the relationship of this order (rejected, slain, raised) to us as Christians, then we have a sterile orthodoxy, and we have no true Christian life. Christian life will wither and die; spirituality in any true biblical sense will come to an end.

--Francis Schaeffer, "True Spirituality" (p. 22)

God of the Gaps? Not my God.

There are quite a few possibilities for posts bouncing around in my head right now, but I'll stick with this one for tonight. This was put in my mind this morning by Doug Eaton over on his blog (Doug contributes to Apologetics.com relatively regularly, and does a fine job there, too), though I confess that the gist of this post has been with me for a while.

The charge occasionally made by the naturalist that the Christian needs a supernatural explanation to fill in the gaps of knowledge (especially scientific knowledge, it seems to me). Forgetting for the moment that I am not aware of a Christian ever actually using God as a stopgap to plug up holes in our knowledge (though I suppose someone probably has), the argument nevertheless is fallacious, as Eaton points out:

The problem with the “god of the gaps’ argument is that it is a question begging argument since it assumes from the outset that God is merely an explanation to unknown things and not an actual being. As the argument goes, since we now understand so much more than we did in previous generations, we have less need to create a god to answer our questions, and we can now live without this myth called god. This may be a good way for the naturalist to side step the issue of whether God really exists or not, but pulling premises from your conclusion in order to validate your conclusion never makes for a good argument.

Eaton also quotes Bonhoeffer admirably:

How wrong it is to use God as a stop-gap for the incompleteness of our knowledge. If in fact the frontiers of knowledge are being pushed further and further back (and that is bound to be the case), then God is being pushed back with them, and is therefore continually in retreat. We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know; God wants us to realize his presence, not in unsolved problems but in those that are solved.

Exactly! I see this in my own discipline (mathematics). Not many mathematicians have undertaken the task of articulating a distinctively Christian perspective of the philosophy of mathematics (though some have). Nevertheless, I do not believe that I am in error when I say that most Christian mathematicians see their discipline not in the formalist tradition of playing games within a formal system using pencil and paper, but as a extant, pure scientific discipline that can make meaningful statements about the world in which we live. All of the mathematics that is known currently, in addition to all the mathematics that will ever be known, has been known to God from all eternity.

I look at the grand structure of mathematics and see God's handiwork. The key here is that act of plugging the gaps in mathematical knowledge only serves to further the awe I have of God's mathematical creation. As useful as it is, the arithmetic known to the ancient Greeks does little shed light on the beauty of God's mathematical creation. Having had the chance to study even rudimentary abstract structures and begin to see the glorious beauty in them, I am more convinced of God's creative power than I ever would have been if I had simply learn how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. I see the same thing happening in the other sciences. As scientists have studied the Earth, its inhabitants, and our place in the solar system, galaxy, and universe, we see that we are...fortunate in our location (with respect to all of those locations). In other words, the more we know, the more we see God in our knowledge, and not in gaps in knowledge.

Australia

Just a few quick notes on what's going on in Australia. I don't have much time to type and so this will be brief and disorganised.
First of all, I like Australia for the most part. I am in Brisbane at Griffith Uni. on Nathan campus working with Student Life (partner with Campus Crusade for Christ). 19 other U.S. college students are with me. We are making relationships with Uni students in order to plant seeds and preach the gospel. Ausies are very relational, but many don't like to talk about deep spiritual ideas...i.e. death, salvation, sin, Jesus (the last three being words many have never heard) I've been fortunate to talk with a few people who are open to going a little deeper. I actually presented the gospel to two girls last Thursday and it looked like lights came on behind their eyes (pray that I and a Stinter are able to meet with them again). Just to end and to partially in response to a comment by James(?): I hope this doesn't read like I'm being mean or arogant, because I'm really trying not to...it's hard to write out how I want to say things...but anyhoo:
If anything I'm only a three point Calvinist. I don't believe you can take from Scripture as a whole that there are those who are chosen by God to go to Heaven and those chosen to go to Hell. I'm hoping to elaborate on what I believe after I get back to the States, I just wanted to let you know where I stand first off...I'm open to the fact that I could be wrong also..........so, the reason I do evangelism becuase I am responsible for preaching the gospel to those who have never heard, not for them choosing but for them hearing, becuase how can they choose if the have not heard, and how can the hear if no one tells them. Again, I hope this comes across as me simply letting you know where I stand. I'm looking forward to discussing this more in depth with you all later...Mike will get the brunt of it outside the cyber-world :)
Please pray for my team and I to have unity among eachother and to stay focused on what we are here to do and to have confidence in that. Especially pray that we rely on God for everything we do and want to do, because if we don't have the Holy Spirit working through us then our works are worthless.
Jordan

P.S. Mike, I miss you buddy.