my mind doesn't often remember things from this time - but today it did.

This post isn't about the time, or what happened or the relationship with my husband.

This post is about my relationship with my dad. There are times when words just don't say what you need to say and Dad and I are like that a lot.

It was the drive past the cemetary that triggered these memories. I drive past this cemetary almost daily, but today I took a different road and it went along a side of the cemetary that I don't usually see. It was the "new part", with the empty space - the unused plots.

Five years ago my husband was dying and my dad didn't know what to say. What can you say?

What he did was hand me an envelope. In the envelope were the deeds to a cemetary lot (well, half a lot, which is two plots). It's half of the lot where my mom and dad will be buried. This is a very small cemetary and there is no space left in the "old part", where my grandparents, two of my great-grandparents - let's just say lots of relatives.

I have a cousin who had been wanting to buy these plots; we're a close family and she wanted to plan to be buried next to Grandma.

What my dad did I think bothered her. But it also sent a message:

I may live far away, I may not be planning on moving back. But I'm family - and my dad was doing what he could to take care of me.

The cemetary plots were his way of telling me that he loved me and wanted to take care of me

Rewind to 1987

Some things are just hard to say - you can say them, but sometimes words just aren't enough.

My son was born, early and tiny - he was in NICU. My mom and dad drove 170 miles every day until I was out of the hospital (they bent the rules for moms with babies who had to stay so I was there a couple of days longer than I had to be). They were both still working full time, so it wasn't easy on them. But they did it.

I told my dad, "The only way that I can truly tell you how I feel about you is to name my son after you."

I still don't have the words that can adequately express - but hopefully every time my dad thinks about my son...he knows.

This week's Carnival of Beauty is "The Beauty of Order". I have to look to the Lord for order, since I tend to have not very much of it on my own.

Our God is a God of order.

And our God has a plan. Sometimes part of the plan is for us not to be in on the plan.

I've been reading in the Old Testament and have been struck by how specific the Lord was when He gave directions and how He ordered (organized) His people. In Numbers, instructions were given to Moses...The glory of the LORD was connected with cloud (remember, pillar of fire by night, cloud by day)

A couple of books later, in Numbers:
On the day the tabernacle, the Tent of the Testimony, was set up, the cloud covered it. From evening till morning the cloud above the tabernacle looked like fire. That is how it continued to be; the cloud covered it, and at night it looked like fire. Whenever the cloud lifted from above the Tent, the Israelites set out; wherever the cloud settled, the Israelites encamped. At the LORD's command the Israelites set out, and at His command they encamped. As long as the cloud stayed over the tabernacle, they remained in camp. When the cloud remained over the tabernacle a long time, the Israelites obeyed the LORD's order and did not set out. Sometimes the cloud was over the tabernacle only a few days; at the LORD's command they would encamp, and then at His command they would set out. Sometimes the cloud stayed only from evening till morning, and when it lifted in the morning, they set out. Whether by day or by night, whenever the cloud lifted, they set out. Whether the cloud stayed over the tabernacle for two days or a month or a year, the Israelites would remain in camp and not set out; but when it lifted, they would set out. At the LORD's command they encamped, and at the LORD's command they set out. They obeyed the LORD's order, in accordance with his command through Moses.

What an example of the LORD's leading! Not that the Israelites were a prime example of trust - in fact I remember describing them as "whiners". But in this, they simply waited and didn't move until the LORD told them to.

What a hard lesson to learn - wait and obey.

Earlier in the Bible, it tells about organization in travel. I'm not going to do all the "cutting and pasting", but if you want to see how specific it was, read here.

Our God is a God of order.

It is a hard lesson to learn - God has a plan and part of His plan is to not let us in on it. Order our lives; wait and obey is a factor in everything.

I read a book on the “imprecatory Psalms” a few weeks ago.

Can we, as Christians, pray for the destruction of our enemies? If we follow the pattern of the book of Psalms, it would appear that we can (and should). Yet it doesn’t seem to mesh with the “Law of Love”.

The author of “War Psalms” said (in a nutshell) that if we believe that it is God (in the Trinity) speaking through Scripture and if we believe that Christ is the Word, then we can reasonably read the Psalms (particularly the Messianic Psalms) as Christ looking forward to His human life.

Reading the imprecatory Psalms in this way – and looking forward to the “holy week” and Easter season – we can perhaps see the author’s point.

Read this, thinking Christ in during His last week and His trial.

Manda and I visited a church this morning (Tom has a long work day) and I have a lot of thoughts.

1) the church has beautiful stained glass
2) the church has a real pipe organ - I love pipe organs
3) the church has some very friendly people
4) there was a lot of Scripture read before the sermon
5) they sang beautiful old hymns
6) the church is CRC.

but...
(there was no choir loft)
5) the pastor was not "animated"
6) the pastor was "tied" to the pulpit - that's where the microphone was
7) the pastor read the Scripture the sermon was based on once at the beginning, but I don't remember any connecting Scripture.
8) the prayers were written out in the bulletin
9) the pastor gave (LOTS) of examples, etc., and did connect them to the Scripture.
10) the pastor gave (LOTS) of anctidotes, and did connect them to the Scripture
11) the pastor gave (LOTS) of stories, and did connect them to the Scripture
(Do you think I'm after more expository teaching?)
12) the congregation appeared to be more heavily weighted toward the older end of the scale.
13) I saw very few young people/teens
14) I saw one (1) person raise their hands during worship (not me)
15) there was no choir loft (my commitment to my friend)

A couple other thoughts:

On my old church: The whole FirehouseFamily thing was a result of (or at least brought to a head by) work trips to New Orleans. This had not clicked with me (don't know why) but the Christian Reformed Church has a great organization in place called CRWRC. In my previous (married) life, I worked with the American Red Cross and in our county they worked very closely with CRWRC, so I know that this is a great and effective organization.

Sunshine went outside the denomination (with its established connections) and ended up with a relationship with FirehouseFamily.

Why? My friend (and I) think that it's because they are deliberately distancing themselves from denominational ties with the CRC.

The other thought.

It's been a while since I've been in a church without powerpoint. That's not a good thing or a bad thing...just a thing.

Mark Driscoll, on his blog, wrote a few comments about large and small churches today (from Lyle Schaller in The Very Large Church:

Larger churches tend to be more conservative in theology and more liberal in practice, while smaller churches are often more liberal in theology and more conservative in outward practice (e.g., liturgy, hymns, and vestments).

Larger churches tend to present clear, authoritative teaching from Scripture while theological pluralism tends to thrive in smaller churches.

There are more, but these two are the ones I want to address.

I am theologically conservative - and I think that I'm more conservative than most when it comes to liturgy, hymns, etc.

The church that I'm leaving is not a "mega-church" (The term megachurch generally refers to any congregation with a sustained average weekly attendance of 2000 persons or more in its worship services.) I went there looking for Reformed teaching (which I do get from the pulpit), but I also went there looking for Reformed practice (which I don't get).

The comment from Driscoll's blog is mixed at Sunshine. The theology from the pulpit is conservative, yet in everyday living, the teaching is not reformed (including Neil Anderson, Alpha Course, the "relationship" with the Prophet and Apostle's church). And the practice is more liberal than the teaching.

The second comment is not as clear at Sunshine. The teaching from the pulpit and the teaching at other times can be very different. Yes, clear authoritative teaching from the Scripture is given from the pulpit. But "theological pluralism" was very much alive and well.

I'm looking for the "happy medium" Not too big, not too small.

Sound, authoritative Scriptural teaching from the pulpit and in practice. "Conservative when it should be and liberal when it should be.

I don't want to be in a church with close ties to churches that insist that in order to be effective you have to speak in tongues. I won't be in a church that includes extra-Biblical qualifications in order to be considered "holy", "saved", "sanctified", "gifted", or whatever.

On the flip side, the "truly reformed" churches in my area include some that seem to consider the Westminster Confession nearly on par with Scripture. Count me out on that too.

Just give me teaching from the Bible.

It will make somebody's day if you click here.

I blogged about this book and you can read about the success of her campaign to have it blogged about here.

If anybody is reading this and is so inclined - please help Brenda Coulter out by passing this along (or linking to this post).

Just for kicks, let's see if we can get a "Christian romance" novel at #1!

The following quote (courtesy Catez Stevens) comes here in a roundabout way from Brain Cramps for God. (Follow the link for his blog and a link to the direct quote.)

There is a tension that can develop between two different aspects of the Christian life. Should we be the city on the hill or the salt of the earth? Should we be a very separate group of people removed from others and wait for people to come to us - or should we be sprinkled out in the world like seasoning making a difference in our particular circles? Of course the obvious answer is both, but we don't always find the balance of both so easily.

Here's the problem: Salt is not only a seasoning. In Biblical times, one of salt's most extensive purposes was preserving meat and fish.

There was a lot of things wrapped in that quote, and I don't really want to get into that again - most of my thought processes on this matter are going out there on a church search, so that's the direction I'm going) but I've really been pondering the uses of salt.

This is going off on my own little "thought process", so there will probably be disagreement - oh well...

Looking at two very important descriptions in the Bible: meat and fish.

With meat (used as a description in the KJV for deep doctrine) and fish (Jesus said He would make His disciples "fishers of men" - making men the fish), salt was used to preserve these two foods.

Being the "salt of the earth" isn't just about being sprinkled out there for a little flavor. It's also about preservation - keeping the food good and safe.

All the flavoring (salt) in the world isn't going to help much if the meat (doctrine) has gone bad.

Same thing with fish. If we are "fishers of men", then other Christians are the fish. Are we out there "flavoring" them, or is our goal to help keep them safe?

Taking a look at the church my membership is currently at, how does all this relate?

Are my church leaders being "salt" to the congregation?

Are they preserving sound doctrine?
Are they "sprinkling" their congregation out into the world without making sure of the saltiness?
Are is it becoming that they are just out there for the flavor?

And how does this relate to me personally?
Am I trying to be "salt" when it comes to what my church is teaching?
Am I tring to convey to my children the "saltiness" that they need in order to be effective when they are "sprinkled out"? (one of them is really struggling, one of them is really taking off)
Is my family "preserving" or "flavoring"?

As I am in the process of looking for a new church, I'm reflecting not only on what Sunshine is doing wrong, but what I want to see done right in a church that I belong to. (This will probably take a while.)

Biblical elements of corporate worship include preaching and teaching the Word of God, prayer, the public reading of Scripture, the singing of Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, and celebrating the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's Supper. (Read the whole article)

I'm not advocating for "if it's not in the Bible we can't do it" mindset (that rules out Easter songs, instrumental music and powerpoint.) But I'm thinking that we can apply the "Solas" to worship. Because of my recent experiences, I'm looking again at the basis for the church I end up choosing.

After many conversations, I believe that worship is not a "free for all", with everyone being able to "worship in their own way". God, better than anybody, knows how He wants to be worshiped. I'm reading in the Old Testament and I just got done reading all of the regulations that He placed on Israel - right down to the setup of the camp and the order that they would march in when traveling.

When making the tabernacle, God ordained even the number of "curtain rings" on each side of the curtain and the tiniest detail of the robes the priests were to wear.

God knows how He likes to be worshiped.

To review, the Five Solas are:

Sola Scriptura: the inerrant Scripture is the sole source of written divine revelation, which alone can bind the conscience. (other sources will say that "Scripture is the only inspired and infallible guide to faith and conduct")

Solus Christus: our salvation is accomplished by the mediatorial work of the historical Christ alone.

Sola Gratia: in salvation we are rescued from God's wrath by His grace alone.

Sola Fide: justification is by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone. In justification Christ's righteousness is imputed to us as the only possible satisfaction of God's perfect justice.

Soli Deo Gloria: because salvation is of God and has been accomplished by God, it is for God's glory.

A commenter asked, "Not sure if this is too big a question to answer using comments, but I would so appreciate a Calvinistic response to this scenario: whilst (I love using that word) in Bible College, there was a great guy that everyone loved. Passionate but not obnoxious in his faith, participated in the classes, faithfully showed up for prayer meetings, confessed his faith in Jesus, etc etc etc.

A few years later, I ran into his wife and she reported that he had had an affair, left her; and renounced his faith!...So, it appears (and I know that appearances can be deceiving!) to me that he had abandoned the faith that he once practiced and proclaimed. What would a "once saved always saved" construct say to that? It just seems to easy to say that he was never saved in the first place. Could it truly be that simple?"

It is a big question. There are folks that can answer/debate it a lot better than I can - and it's a question that has been around for a long time and I doubt we'll settle it here 😉

One of the things that makes it difficult to answer whether or not the person in question was ever saved (did they "fall away", or were they ever saved in the first place?) is that we can't see into their heart.

The Bible says that there will be people who believe that they were saved, but will get to heaven and hear Jesus say, "Depart from me, I never knew you."

These two verses would appear to say that if you are truly saved, you will remain - and that it is God that will carry the good work in us to completion.

1 John 2:19
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

Philippians 1:6
being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.

Was the man you knew truly saved (did he truly love the Lord with all his heart, all his mind and all his strength?). I cannot answer that.

Another thought is that we do not know what God has planned for this man for the rest of his life. Will he return to God? I cannot answer that either.

What I do know is that "in him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will..."

I belong to a sovereign God who is in control of the universe. He has chosen, elected, predestined - whatever word you want to use - His people.

John 10:27-29 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.

This is a short answer, I know. I hope it helps.