Author Archives: MzEllen

• 3 Comments

•

Soon after my husband died, I had the urge to do something that "my husband's wife" would not have done. It began my journey to "me", not "Mrs."

Actually, I did a lot of things that "Art's wife" would not have done. Got a cell phone contract, actually did research and changed churches, changed my major...and a few other things that not a lot of people know about. These are not "poor me" things - they are growth things, and I don't regret them.

My old pastor nearly went postal when I took a camping trip by myself (I was going to say all by myself, but the dog went along. I threw the tent and an overnight bag in the trunk and away we went. I did wimp out and stay in a hotel when the temperature dropped into the lower 30's (in the Upper Penninsula of Michigan - in July). He advocated for me to stay home and be safe ("you don't know who you'll run into"). I went to a lot of the places that Art and I went together and it taught me that I enjoyed some things a lot more by myself. It was the first time I had traveled alone and it was GOOD.

The "out of character" things seem be every two years and center around dates - two years ago, it was the day before the anniversary of my widowhood.

This year - well, today would have been my 27th anniversary.

And this year...the tattoo wins.

•

Sola Scriptura
Solus Christus
Sola Gratia

By God's grace alone are we saved. Without the grace of God, we are nothing, can do nothing, can be nothing - but lost. I'll let God speak for Himself.

I'll start with the greeting of Paul, to his spiritual siblings

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Cor. 1:3)

By grace, we are chosen in Christ (Romans 11:5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace.)

By grace, and nothing of ourselves, we are saved. (Ephesians 2:8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—)

Even the workds that we do are not our own, it is the grace of God (1 Corinthians 15:10 No, I worked harder than all of them—yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me)

We are dead, but for grace (Ephesians 2:5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.)

I'll leave you with this, the closing of Paul to the Thessalonians:

1 Thessalonians 5:28 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

Amazing Grace
lyrics by John Newton, 1779

Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

'Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears relieved.
How precious did that grace appear
The hour I first believed!

Through many dangers, toils, and snares,
I have already come.
'Tis grace hath brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

And when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease,
I shall possess within the vail
A life of joy and peace.

When we've been there ten thousand years,
Bright shining as the sun,
We've no less days to sing God's praise
Than when we first begun.

• 3 Comments

•

GRAND RAPIDS -- Despite the stunning resignation of its top administrator over an allegedly inappropriate relationship with a female colleague, the Christian Reformed Church will recover and heal, the CRC's newly named executive director says.

Read more...

Right off, this may be seen as airing somebody else's dirty laundry - but there is a very real purpose in it. Paul tells us church leaders are to be rebuked publically, so that others can be warned - read this and be warned.

This is my denomination, and Mr. Bremer has been well loved in it. A woman that I work with said today that he had been her family's pastor when they lived in another state and when he was first chosen, one of the ladies in my ministry group said the same thing. He has been highly respected and it is always sad to see a man of God fall. Our prayers should cover all of the people involved.

The thoughts that I've (I've been pondering this for a few hours) are a result of things that were said at work. I've said before that I live in a very special area; of the four staff in my classroom this summer, all four are professed Christians, two are CRC, two are Catholic - in most areas, how many public school classrooms can say that?

Anyway...we were talking about the news this morning and this came up.

The first thoughts center around the act. (hint: the third thoughts may be the most important.)

One of the women commented, "You see, it happens in other churches, too." I have a few thoughts related to that comment - the first one that happened to pop into my head was that "at least our denomination took care of it, instead of tranferring the guy and/or paying somebody off and/or sweeping it under the rug." But that doesn't make the sin any less, it just makes the denomination more credible in the way that they deal with it.

The second group of thoughts center around the consequences.

1) When confronted with the information, Bremer resigned within hours. The consequences were immediate, definite and public. (1 Timothy 5:19-20 Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning) It does matter, Biblically, that it was public and not swept away, only to be made public years later.

2) Bremer denies a sexual relationship and officials are not alleging a sexual relationship. This is important - it really is. This means that the CRC is taking a stand that male/female relationships that are not sexual, but still cross boundaries are still serious enough for this kind of consequence.

The third set of thoughts center around the aftermath

One of the women I work with said this: "I told my husband that if he ever made a fool of me that way, with his name in the paper and all that - it would be all over - no second chances."

Within this marriage, this story could be a testament to consequences, or it could be a testament to repentance, forgiveness and restoration. Only time will tell what it will be.

If Bremer repents and commits to accountability and everything else it takes to make repentance real - will his wife forgive "seventy times seven". I know that every time it comes to mind (and it will come to mind), the forgiveness will have to take place in her mind. At least seventy times seven - and many more.

Will she forgive as God forgives? Will she commit to never bringing it up against him - to him, to others and even (with God's help) to herself? In the face of her husband's repentance, will she see her lack of forgiveness as a sin at least equal to the one that her husband committed?

Only time will tell...and God's hand will have to be on all of it, and my prayers are with them.

• 1 Comment

•

Sola Scriptura
Solus Christus

If we believe that Scripture is our only infallible and ultimate authority for faith and things of faith, it follows that all other theology must flow from Scripture. When when theology comes from extra-Biblical writing and/or historical writings and/or tradition and cannot be backed up by Scripture, the theology must be discarded.

Solus Christus - Christ alone. By Christ's finished work on the cross, alone, are we saved.

There is no other mediator (or mediatrix) (1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus...

There is no other Redeemer (or redemptress) (Hebrews 9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. )

John Calvin said in the Institutes of the Christian Religion, "Christ stepped in, took the punishment upon himself and bore the judgment due to sinners. With his own blood he expiated the sins which made them enemies of God and thereby satisfied him...we look to Christ alone for divine favour and fatherly love!"

The Heidelberg Catechism, Question 30 asks, "Do such then believe in Jesus the only Saviour who seek their salvation and happiness in saints, in themselves, or anywhere else? They do not; for though they boast of him in words yet in deeds they deny Jesus the only deliverer and Saviour: for one of these two things must be true that either Jesus is not a complete Saviour or that they who by a true faith receive this Saviour must find all things in him necessary to their salvation."

• 3 Comments

•

Thanks to the commenter on Thinklings that recommended a book, "Finding God in Harry Potter", I took this and ran with it, probably way farther than I should have. My son and I just saw "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" and on the way home, Tom bore the brunt of my ranting, conceded that I had a point and then tried to make me take a Ritalin (I'm joking - about the Ritalin part.)

If fact, this whole post is not meant to be serious, please don't take it seriously - the point is that if you try hard enough, you can find a "christ figure" (lower case "c" on purpose) in just about anything. The lower case "c", because sometimes what you think is Christ isn't Christ at all...and sometimes we try to see Christ (or God) in things that were never meant to portray Him. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...and sometimes fiction is just fiction. So, put your tongue in cheek now, since that's where mine is...it's ok to say "ew" and "you're really wierd". Anybody that knows us (my family) will tell you anyway that trying to believe that we're anything resembling normal is - wierd.

Anyway, I'm not giving anything away, since what I'm poking at is in the original also. Short review - I liked it, but don't take little kids. Johnny Depp was a little wierd and over-acted, but that was the point, so it was ok. Tom missed "the song". I knew beforehand that some women really had an "ick" thing going on when they saw Depp photos as Willie Wonka side by side with Michael Jackson. Not me - right away (and there was an "ick factor") ummm....Geena Davis.

And - on with the show...

We know that we're to spread the Gospel to the whole world (Wonka bars went out to the whole world). Only a few (five) would really receive the "call" (ticket).

And, in fact, even many who think they're accepting the invitation (factory tour) are only doing it out of greed, not out of gratefulness. In the end, they won't receive the prize (Matthew 7:23
Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!')

All of us with have to deal with tempation. I can resist drugs very easily, but man - put me in young Mr. Gloop's shoes...The dragon tailors our temptations to our weaknesses. Augustus Gloop and the chocolate river, Violet Beauregarde and chewing gum, Mike Teevee and technology, Veruca Salt and, well...greed for just about everything. Most of us can add our own names and our own weaknesses (1 Peter 5:8 Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour.) The comparison falls apart here, because it was Wonka that was putting the temptation in front of these children and God doesn't tempt us with sin - but you do get the impression that Wonka knew what was going to make these kids fall.

Onward - it really struck me that of all those who hear the Gospel, only a few accept. Even of those that accept, some of those don't really mean it. Only those who remain faithful to the end receive the prize (Philippians 3:14 I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.)

Wonka was looking for his heir, and we are heirs (Galatians 3:29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.)

Charlie was the only one who perservered to the end. The biggest difference is that he only had his own power. We are running with the the anointing of God, the power of the Holy Spirit and the Blood of Christ (2 Corinthians 1:21 Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us).

We may be called to give up everything we own, everything we love - we may be called to leave our home, our family - in order to live for Christ, to receive the prize.

I'm not sure exactly how to end this, except to remind everybody that YES!!! This is a stretch! That's the point. In most Hollywood productions, any resemblance to Christ is accidental.

• 3 Comments

•

I'm posting this tonight, before getting my "stuff" around for tomorrow - and tomorrow will be a long day, I'm driving Manda halfway to Chicago to spend the week with my husband's sisters (they're still a big part of our life). They'll be heading up to the Wisconsin Dells so I'll be missing my girl.

I'm going to start with what I believe to be true, starting with the "Five Solas".

I am pretty new to Reformed Theology, but once I got my mind wrapped around the idea that what I grew up with had more problems than what I wanted to deal with, I embraced this. I also chose one of the more liberal Reformed demoninations (on purpose).

Anyway...my belief about Sola Scriptura is that the Holy Scriptures are our final authority. It is not that we don't recognize any other authority - we recognize our spiritual mentors, pastors, etc. But all of the other authorities are measured against Scripture.

Paul praised the Bereans for examining what he said against Scripture; we do the same. We don't have our Scripture interpreted for us through man - the man is judged against Scripture. If they don't agree - Scripture wins.

If a person tells me that something is permissible, but the Bible says that it is not - the Bible wins (example: homosexuality).

If a person tells me that something is not permissible, it is up to him to show me in the Bible where the law comes from (example: having a drink with dinner).

If a person is teaching a doctrine that is not in the Bible, that doctrine is rejected (Tongues as the sign of the New Covenant).

I'm not such a big fan of Martin Luther, but this is what he said, "Unless I am overcome with testimonies from Scripture or with evident reasons -- for I believe neither the Pope nor the Councils, since they have often erred and contradicted one another -- I am overcome by the Scripture texts which I have adduced, and my conscience is bound by God's Word."

I also have problems with parts of the Reformed confessions (as does my church) and the confessions are not my authority, the Bible is. However, when they put things in a better way than I can come up with, I'll quote them. The Belgic Confession says, "We believe that [the] holy Scriptures fully contain the will of God, and that whatsoever man ought to believe unto salvation is sufficiently taught therein...Neither may we consider any writings of men, however holy these men may have been, of equal value with those divine Scriptures nor ought we to consider custom or the great multitude, or antiquity, or succession of times and persons, or councils, decrees or statutes, as of equal value with the truth of God... Therefore, we reject with all our hearts whatsoever does not agree with this infallible rule"

In short, every authority, every standard and every message must be examined against the Scriptures. There is no man, no tradition that has more authority than the Word of God.

•

The diet wagon, I mean...took a couple of days off, but today I'm doing pretty well...

For lunch, grilled salmon fillets with yellow squash...

I've got steaks for the grill, but Tom is the griller in the family, he's very particular about who uses his grill...

Work lunches are sometimes tricky...tomorrow my class is going to see "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" and we're taking sack lunches to eat at the theater. Atkins doesn't always go well with brown bags.

So, the plan is to make my lunch and green tea tonight (must have caffeine in the morning) and hopefully remember it (I put my keys in my lunch bag - that helps)

Yogurt with blueberries
salad with romaine and tomatoes
grilled tip steak
celery and cream cheese
and a low-carb Slim Fast snack bar for on the way home.

Atkins just takes more planning than a "grab it and go" lunch.

• 13 Comments

•

A commenter here (Elena) left a link in the comments section that (in a nutshell) says that our Christian marriages must reflect the church's marriage to God (so far, I agree). To go further (relate it to birth control), God would never use contraception in His marriage to the church, therefore we must never use birth control either. This theology (study of God) does not address the difference between artificial birth control and Natural Family Planning.

Actually, I fully accept Philothea Rose's view on God's marriage and our marriage...I just followed her reasoning to its logical conclusion...read on.

This is, primarily, mental Onanism. Fun, with little hope of producing anything.

Anyway, given that the way God increases His family is through salvation, the linked post connects contraception with sotierology. This argument actually strengthens the idea that God has a permissive will when it comes to family planning - and that God is a Calvinist (actually, the correct way of looking at the grammar - that Calvin's theology of sotierology is correct).

I'm going to look at this from both a Calvinist and Arminian/Catholic view of salvation.

This is premise I'm using - either you are conceived here and "born" when you enter heaven, or you are both conceived and fully born into the faith here.

1) (everybdy). We all recognize that God works in real and specific ways, and at very specific times in order to bring us to Him. If we fall upon our faith in His timing, is He not planning the time of "conception"? This supports family planning...however...

1) (Arminian/Catholic) If the way God increases His family is through salvation, and His will is that *everybody* comes to Him - how can you then justify Natural Family Planning? If God wants every single person possible to come into His family, how can a couple who says that artifical birth control is wrong, justify *not* wanting every single person possible to come into their family? I don't think you can. If you want your marriage to truly reflect God's marriage, you must strive to have as many babies as you possibly can. The Natural Family Planning thing does not reflect God's marriage.

2) (Calvinist) If the way God increases His family through salvation, and you believe in election (some are chosen, some are not), those who are "hardened", those who are prepared for destruction - the objects of God's wrath...these are never conceived. Faith is a gift from God and faith = belief = being conceived into the family of God. In sotierology/contraception theology, those who do not receive the gift of faith (belief/fertility) also do not receive the gift of life (conception/salvation).

3) (Arminian/Catholic) Arminius and the Catholic Church teach that a person can lose their salvation. This is where I think that an Arminian or Catholic should (yes, should find this sotierology/contaception theology absolutely abhorant.

If God gives a person the gift of life (salvation/conception) only to remove it later - is that abortion, or infanticide? The other issue - if God can abort a person that He has given the gift of life to, because He has found them wanting, that supports the idea that it is permissible for a couple to abort a baby that is found wanting. Do you really want to go there?

I reject the idea that God supports either abortion or infanticide, when it comes to His marriage and His family, so I must either reject Arminianism/Catholicism or sotierology/contracteption or both.

4) On the flip side, Calvinism, once a child is conceived (saved), they are secure, God will never get rid of them. There will be those who "fall on rocky soil", who never come to belief (I guess you could relate that to a miscarriage). But once you are given the gift of faith, God will not lose you.

So, there here are the points - if you truly want to
- God either is permissive (or even actively supports) family planning, or all family planning is sin, even NFP
- if you believe that the doctrine of election is true, then God specifically plans His family.
- if you believe that a person can lose their salvation, then God supports (and practices) either abortion or infanticide (I reject this)
- If you believe perserverance of the saints - that you cannot lose your salvation, then you believe that God would never abort one of His children.

Conclusion - if you're a Calvinist, you're okay with God practicing family planning. If God's okay with family planning, I am too...

If you believe that a person can lose his or her salvation, you are also okay with God practicing family planning, only in a much more disturbing way.

Taken to its logical conclusion, either this theology does not work...or Calvin was right.

• 5 Comments

•

This is a beautiful verse about the way a marriage should be handled. I'm still trying to figure out how to get Greek letters in here...

But Young's Literal Translation (awkward but accurate) says:
Defraud not one another, except by consent for a time, that ye may be free for fasting and prayer, and again may come together, that the Adversary may not tempt you because of your incontinence;

A couple of things really popped out at me...

Defraud is just like it sounds. I've done some studies on Old Testament marriage contracts and there were three things that were always guaranteed. A home (the husband provides and the wife maintains), food/oil (the husband provides and the woman prepares) and bed (sexual relations). These three things were so important, if any of these three were denied on a regular basis, it was grounds for divorce. To enter into a marriage and refuse the marraige bed was to defraud the mate of marital rights.

except by consent: this really caught my eye, concerning marriage in general.

sumphonou - sounds like "symphony" and means, in harmonious accord. Isn't that the way a marriage should work? Each half of the whole striving to be in harmonious accord. Just like the word that we get from this, symphony - it doesn't imply that you are in lockstep. Just like a symphony, each partner plays his or her own instrument. One time, one will have the melody, another time, the other will. And each time, their mate will be behind them, harmonizing, supporting. A symphony wouldn't be a symphony if everyone played the same note! So it is with marriage.

pros kairos hina scholazo - for a limited time, in order to give oneself to

fasting and prayer

and again may come together, (be one flesh, husband and wife, give one another comfort and pleasure)

that the Adversary may not tempt you because of your incontinence; How many people have fallen, because their spouse didn't pay attention to the consequences of denying their other half? I submit that a husband or wife that denied his or her spouse is a stumbling block the likes of which few people ever see.

This verse communicates the importance of "one-flesh-ness" and the importance of setting it aside only for the things of God, and then only for limited times.

I would submit that a husband or wife should not have to go without marital relations (unless there are special circumstances that prohibit them) for any longer than they also expect their husband and wife to go without food.  There is no reason for denying one's spouse the comfort and pleasure that a marriage bed should bring.  (The last paragraph has been edited just because it  was an awkward sentence and didn't quite say what I wanted it to say.