MMM | Issue 10

Hi all,

Well, in conjunction with the "Faith and Doubt" series, I thought I'd write one more MMM.

As usual, you can listen to last Sunday morning's message, "Faith and Belief" on-line at www.rivercommunity.ca. Also as usual, feel free to e-mail me with your feedback or questions.

Before I begin musing, I'm wondering if you might be willing to do me a favour; that is, e-mail me and tell me why you believe. I'm doing a message this Sunday morning (the last one in the series) called, "Why I Believe" and I'd like to use some of your thoughts in building my message. Just reply to this e-mail and I'll receive whatever you write. Just so you know, I promise to let you be anonymous this Sunday morning.

Now, normally when I muse, I try to build on what I said the previous Sunday. But this week, I want to look ahead. I want to give you one of my reasons for believing that I won't get to this Sunday, but I find compelling. It goes like this: I believe that the way people argue suggests that God exists.

This idea comes by way of a man named C. S. Lewis. When we argue, we say things like, "That's not right! That's not good! You're not being fair!" In other words, we appeal to a standard that is independent and objective and higher than you and I. We appeal to the idea that there is such a thing as right and wrong.

In theory, many people in our day hold the belief that right and wrong are subjective-just preference-just vanilla and chocolate. You have yours, and I have mine. Everybody is different. An author named Denis de Souza has written a book entitled, What's So Great About Christianity? He points out that in our society, we will often hear this statement: "Don't impose your beliefs on me." De Souza says he finds it interesting that we don't say, "Don't impose your geometry on me. Don't impose your chemistry on me." Why not? Because we assume that science and mathematics are about objective reality. So we don't think they can be "imposed" on us. But we often believe that morals and values are simply subjective preferences. You have yours. I have mine. It's all just arbitrary. Every time you hear two people argue, it shows we know better. We believe that moral reality is built into the way that life is.

This is exactly what Paul was saying when he wrote: "The requirements of the Law (What's right and what's wrong.) are written on people's hearts (We can't get away from this. When we argue, we show that we know this.), their consciences also bearing witness and their thoughts, now accusing, now defending them." (Romans 2:15)

Every human being knows two things: There is a way we ought to behave. There is a code, a standard. We might be fuzzy on the details of it sometimes, but we have a general idea of what it is. We know there is a standard that we all ought to live up to, and we all know that we don't live up to it. We all fall short. We need forgiveness. We need grace. We need to get fixed.

Every time people argue, they imply that the universe is not an accident; that there is a moral order built into the way things are. It's there because it was put there by Somebody, and that Somebody was God. The Good News is that He is a gracious God. That's part of why I believe in God.

Well, I hope this primes the pump for this Sunday. See you then!

Keep on keeping on!

MMM | Issue 9

Hi all,

Well, it's Thursday, time for another edition of Monday Morning Musings. I think I'm going to have re-name this thing J. Actually, I had major internet issues this week, so I apologize for the tardiness of this publication.

As usual, you can listen to last Sunday morning's message, "Faith and Hell", on-line at www.rivercommunity.ca. As many of you have already done, feel free to e-mail me with your feedback or questions.

On Monday, I received the following question from a young man who attends The River. He wrote, "My friend has a question, 'Can the Bible be taken absolutely seriously? How should stories such as Noah's Ark as well as chapters like Exodus 21 and Deuteronomy 13 be interpreted?'"

Here's what I wrote in reply:

Thanks for your e-mail. First off, you should know that you are asking a very BIG question about which entire books have been written. However, I'll do my best.

The short answer to your question is yes, the Bible can be taken seriously---in what it intends to teach. That being said, if you try to read the entire Bible literally, you'll get yourself in trouble. Do I believe, for example, that the story of the flood is historical? Well, there are reasons to think that it was, not the least of which is the fact that a flood narrative appears not just in the Jewish text but also in ancient Babylonian and Egyptian texts. Could they all be referring to the same event? Why not?

Now, do I believe it happened exactly as it is depicted in the book of Genesis? Probably not. For example, I think it is highly unlikely that there was a world wide flood. What is going on, I think, is that the Biblical writer is using a story that he's familiar with and crafting it in order to reveal some important truths about God and this world. Actually, it's brilliant writing! Here's what the Hebrew writer wants you to understand.

That human sin and evil will not be allowed to flourish unchecked. God will not allow human evil and the chaos it brings to unravel the "good" of creation. This is precisely why the story of the flood is followed by the story of the tower of Babel in which God thwarts human power and plans.
"a" being said, God will not continually intervene in the affairs of human kind. That is, he will not use direct, "right-handed" power to confront evil as the loss of life would be catastrophic. Neither, will he abandon his good creation. Instead, God will use a more subversive and self-sacrificial means. This is precisely what God initiates in the story of Abram that follows in Genesis 12. (By the way, there is a wholesale change in the Hebrew writing style at this point. It is a style that invites us to read it in a much more historical fashion.)
God remains faithful to His creation (even when we're not). The uninterrupted, flow of life and seasons are a testimony to this.
As for the other texts you mentioned, I'm guessing that the problem your friend has with these texts is that the injunctions mentioned in them seem on the surface to be quite primitive and brutal by our standards.

A few things to consider. First, remember that you are using your 21st century standard of morality to judge a culture that existed in a whole other era. There is no doubt that the era that God was speaking to in these chapters was a whole lot more brutal than ours. There were no police or complex legal systems. Killing your neighbour was much more common. In fact, believe it or not, the legal system that God provided in the Torah was actually (for that time) quite just and even handed. Now, is what God revealed in these chapters (and others such as in Joshua), His good and perfect will for all time and in all places. The answer is no. In fact, Jesus comes to show us the heart of the law. Jesus taught us that in order to do justice, we need a righteousness that goes beyond merely keeping the law (the righteous of the scribes and Pharisees). What we need are hearts filled with a spirit of love; love for God and love for others. This is the fullness of God's revelation in this regard.

The thing that I would advise your friend to do in reading the Bible is to take seriously the genre of literature that he or she is reading (and there are many different types in the Bible) and to ask him or herself, "what is the big truth (the principle) that the Bible wants me to grasp here."

If he or she has any more questions, don't hesitate to ask.

Blessings,

PB

MMM | Issue 8

Hi everyone,

Well, another week is upon us, albeit a snowy one (yuck!), but its time for another musing in conjunction with our Faith and Doubt message series.

As always, last Sunday's message is now on the website at www.rivercommunity.ca. Feel free to listen to it yourself or pass it on to a friend. You can also ask me a question on any topic in relation to faith and doubt by replying to this e-mail.

Let me start with this: How can we believe in Christianity if we don't even know whether God exists? Though there cannot be irrefutable proof for the existence of God, many people have found strong clues for his reality-divine fingerprints-in many places. The philosopher Alvin Plantinga believes that there are no proofs of God that will convince all rational persons. However, he believes that there are at least two to three dozen very good arguments or clues for the existence of God.

Let me share one that I find very compelling-the clue of beauty.

If there is no God, and everything in this world is the product of natural forces, then there is no actual purpose for which we were made-we are accidents. If this is true, then what we call "beauty" is nothing but a neurological response to particular data. You only find certain scenery to be beautiful because you had ancestors who knew you would find food there and they survived because they acted on that impulse. In the same way, though music feels significant, the significance is an illusion. Love too must be seen in this light. If we are the result of natural forces, then what we call "love" is simply a biochemical response, inherited from ancestors who survived because this particular trait helped them survive.

I find this to be a deeply unsatisfying answer. Christian or not, in the presence of real beauty such as a fantastic piece of music or great art, human beings feel a deep sense of meaning and satisfaction. I had a chance this week to visit a wonderful art show put on by a talented artist in our church community (Erica Wilk) and over and over again I found myself feeling what Goethe refers to as selige sehnsucht-blessed longing. Beauty leads us to long for something more, something better, something wonderful.

"So what?" someone might object. "Just because we feel something doesn't make it true." Just because we feel the desire for a steak dinner, for example, doesn't mean we will get it. Agreed. However, while hunger doesn't prove that the steak dinner exists, doesn't the appetite for food in us mean that food exists? Isn't it true that innate desires correspond to real objects that can satisfy them, such as sexual desire (corresponding to sex), physical appetite (corresponding to food), tiredness (corresponding to sleep) and relational desires (corresponding to friendship or love).

I think the blessed longings evoked by beauty are a strong clue that "something" more exists. I think that our longing for beauty is really a longing for the One that the Bible says radiates beauty and overflows goodness. Beauty is a reflection of our beautiful God who through the gift of music, art and dance invites us to taste his splendour and experience his goodness.

Blessings all,

Pastor Bruce

MMM | Issue 7

Hi all,

Since it's Monday, I thought I'd write my weekly Faith and Doubt musing. By the way, yesterday's message is now up on the website. Just go to www.rivercommunity.ca and click on "Recent Messages". Feel free to forward this e-mail to friend so they can join the conversation as well.

Today, I want to say a word about skeptics and trust. Before I say anything , I want to say that I love conversing with skeptics and respect their desire to find the truth. In my judgement, it is better to be a skeptic with an inquiring mind than someone who just doesn't care.

That being said, I do believe that often skeptics would rather, even at their own expense, appear to be right than take the risk of trusting.

The skeptics is someone who says, I'm going to suspend judgment. I'm not going to commit myself, because the demand for sufficient evidence has not yet been met. Now, while this sounds very objective and rational, often the dynamic that is going on underneath the surface is something like this: The skeptic is saying I don't want to be wrong. I don't want to lose the argument. I don't want to risk being hurt or looking gullible.

An example of this from the Bible is the disciple who was known for doubt- "Doubting Thomas." We see him three times in the Gospel of John, and he's always expressing skepticism. The climactic incident occurs after Jesus appears to the other disciples who were gathered together after the Jesus' resurrection. All of them were there except Thomas. They are overjoyed to see Jesus and can't wait to tell Thomas. When they see him, they say, "Thomas, we saw Him! He is alive! He is risen from the dead!" They are stunned by Thomas' response. He says, "I don't believe you."

What Thomas is saying to the other disciples is that they are either lying or delusional, even though he knows better. Despite the fact that he knows them and Jesus; despite the fact that he's spent time with Jesus, heard him preach and witnessed miraculous things, he won't believe. More than any other human being, Thomas had good reasons to believe, but he chose the skeptics path. And he gives a striking response: "Unless I see Jesus myself, unless I see the nail marks in his hands, unless I put my finger in a hole, unless I put my hand in his side, I'm not going to believe." (John 20:25)

Skeptics do this. They demand certainty at a level that they know cannot be obtained. It looks rational, but underneath it's simply human pride. The danger of skepticism is that skeptics can be so invested in being right that they will never find out that God is trustworthy, because they never risk trusting.

Peace,

Pastor Bruce

MMM | Issue 6

Hi all,

Well, we're in week 2 of our "Faith and Doubt" series. In case, you're just joining us, it's a series in which we're looking at the most common objections that people have to Christianity as well aspects of the Christian message that make it persuasive and compelling.

By the way, thanks for all the feedback on yesterday's message. I found our "Faith and Doubt" talk back on Sunday to be lively and interesting. Once again, here's the link to yesterday's message--Sunday Message at The River: Faith and Science. If you know somebody that you'd like to invite into our "Faith and Doubt" conversation, please do so by forwarding them this e-mail.

Here's something interesting I didn't have time for yesterday: A word on faith and scientists.

The first professional scientists can be traced to the late Middle Ages, and since this time the overwhelming majority of them have not only been Christians, but have also viewed their work as a fulfillment of Christian objectives. Morris Kline writes that "the Renaissance scientist was a theologian with nature instead of God as his subject." This does not mean the Renaissance scientist was on a secular path. On the contrary, he saw himself as achieving God's purpose in a new and better way; by going beyond the Bible and exploring His Creation.

Here's a partial list of leading scientists who were Christians: Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Brahe, Descartes, Boyle, Newton, Leibniz, Gassendi, Pascal, Mersenne, Cuvier, Harvey, Dalton, Faraday, Herschel, Joule, Lyell, Lavoisier, Priestly, Kelvin, Ohm, Ampere, Steno, Pasteur, Maxwell, Plank, and Mendal. In fact, a good number of these men were clergymen (which always makes me feel better about my chosen profession).

If you spend a little time digging, you'll be amazed at the faith statements that show up in works of these great minds. For example, one of the greatest scientists of all time, Isaac Newton viewed his work as showing the creative genius of God. He wrote, "This most beautiful system of sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being."

Just some additional food for thought.

Something else you might be interested in. Check out Dinesh D'Souza book, "What's So Great About Christianity" and read the chapter entitled, "An Atheist Fable: Reopening the Galileo Case". For those of you who have been taught that Galileo was persecuted and repressed by the church, you'll be fascinated by the real story.

Blessings,

Pastor Bruce

MMM | Issue 5

Hi all,

Well, we've officially kicked of our "Faith and Doubt" series on Sunday. For those of you who don't know, this series in which we're looking at the most common objections people have to the Christian faith as well reasons for believing. By the feedback I've received so far, there's lots of interest out there.

As promised, here's the link to yesterday's message: "Faith and Doubt: Introduction". If you know somebody that you'd like to invite into our "Faith and Doubt" conversation, please forward this e-mail to them. (BTW, we apologize for the poor quality of this week's audio recording. We had some technical glitches.)

If you're the one being invited, please consider joining us. This should be an interesting ride. Each week, we'll post Sunday's message on our website (usually on Monday) which you can download or listen to on-line. You're also more than welcome to attend one of our Sunday morning services at 9:30 and 10:45 AM at G.H. Luck Elementary school in Rivebend/Terwillegar. You can find directions on our website.

I'd also like to encourage everyone to send me whatever questions or objections to Christianity you might have. I can't promise to answer every e-mail personally, but I will use the substance of what you send me as a jumping off point for the messages in the series. My e-mail is theriver@shaw.ca.

Let me also follow up one of the things I said in yesterday's message; namely, that one of the major challenges we face now a days is not that we think SO much that we have rendered faith obsolete, but that we don't think nearly enough. As a result, we can find ourselves blown by whatever popular philosophical wind happens to be blowing.

As I reflected on this, I think this is true for both believers and sceptics. As such, in this series, I'd like to propose that both believers and sceptics look at doubt in a radically new way.

To believers I want to say that faith without doubt is like a human body without antibodies in it. If you never ask any of the tough questions facing Christianity, you leave yourself vulnerable to the experience of tragedy or the probing questions of a smart sceptic. As a result, you can find your faith collapsing overnight if you have failed over the years to listen to your doubts. So let me encourage you to do some genuine searching and reflecting during this series. Don't mail it in!

To the sceptic, I want to encourage you to look for a type of faith hidden in your reasoning. All doubts, however sceptical and cynical they seem, are really a set of alternatives beliefs. You cannot doubt Belief A except from a position of faith in Belief B. For example, some people say, "I don't believe in Christianity because I can't accept the existence of moral absolutes. Everyone should determine moral truth for him- or herself." Is that a statement they can prove to someone who doesn't share it? No, it is a leap of faith, a deep belief that individual rights operate not only in the political realm but also in the moral. There is no empirical proof for such a position.

My point is that the only way to doubt Christianity rightly and fairly is to discern the alternate belief under each of your doubts and then to ask yourself what reasons you have for believing it. It would be inconsistent to require more justification for Christian belief than you do for your own, but that is what frequently happens. In fairness, you must doubt your doubts.

Let me end with this. May the God you may or may not believe in bless you and guide over the next weeks of this series.

Peace,

Pastor Bruce

MMM | Issue 4

Welcome to another edition of Monday Morning Musings.

Last week, Victor and Eunae (our resident church planters who are planting a new church out of The River) and myself spent a week in Orlando, Florida at what's called a church planters boot camp. In other words, it's basic training for church planters.

First of all, it sounds like we picked a good week to be away. My kid's e-mails to me during the week all began, "Dad, you won't believe how cold it is here." I want you to know that I felt a twinge of guilt, but not a lot.

My job was to accompany Victor and Eunae as their coach, help them strategize, and to receive some more training myself in relation to coaching. Like Victor and Eunae, now that I'm back, I've got a pile of papers, binders, books and other materials to sift through.

Aside from the coaching thing, I learned several things last week. First of all, we have a fabulous church planting team in Victor and Eunae. I am fully confident that with God's blessing they will plant a healthy church out of The River. They are passionate, committed and capable of doing the work. I am so proud to have them on our team. Look for some exciting announcements from them over the next few months.

Second, we're not alone in our passion to see radically inclusive and world transforming churches like The River thrive. All across North America, new churches are being planted and old churches are being renewed with a real heart for the communities in which they find themselves. Moreover, a younger generation of gifted leaders are stepping forward to grow and lead the church. Exciting stuff!

Third and finally, I love this church. I love The River. God has fashioned us into an amazing community. Is He done yet--no. But, there is SO much to celebrate. As I flew back on Saturday morning, I couldn't help but smile at the potential.

Keep on keeping on.